Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 9 P38 pptx

vanquished the South but also had presided over the period known as RECONSTRUCTION.Asa result, white southerners chose to join the DEMOCRATIC PARTY and to elect only Democratic candidates to local and state office. So one-sided was this electoral system that for a number of years, the former Confederate states were known as the “solid South”. In the decades that followed Reconstruction the Democratic Party experienced change and evolution regarding its official views on a number of issues including CIVIL RIGHTS and INTEGRATION. Southern Democrats had begun to feel extremely uncomfortable in the party that they viewed as having become far too liberal. In 1947 President HARRY S. TRUMAN gave a speech to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ( NAACP) that called for the federal government to be the vigilant protector of the civil rights of all Americans. Truman repeated the phrase “all Americans” leaving no doubt that he meant African Americans should be among those who were guaranteed equality of opportunity. This speech was anathema to the southern Democrats who were staunch supporters of SEGREGATION and the preservation of “white power”. In 1948 the Republicans, for the second time, chose New York governor THOMAS E. DEWEY to be their presidential candidate. In July 1948 the Democrats held a convention in which they nominated Harry S. Truman, the former vice-president who had succeeded FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT when the latter died on April 12, 1945. The linchpin of the 1948 Democratic Party platform became its support for civil rights legislation. Man y Democrats were wary of supporting the platform because they feared that the party would splinter over the opposing views of civil rights. The delegates from the southern states were vocal in their opposition, and other delegates began to waver. Then HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, the delegate from Minnesota and mayor of Minneapolis, gave a speech in which he urged his fellow delegates to “get out of the shadow of states’ rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights!” Humphrey’s passionate words were the catalyst for the majority of the Democratic Party delegates to vote for the platform planks that called for a federal anti-lynching law, the ABOLITION of POLL TAXES in federal elections, desegregation of the armed forces, and creation of a perma- nent Fair Employment Practices Committee that would prevent RACIAL DISCRIMINATION in federal jobs. A majority of southern delegates, including all 22 members of the Mississippi delegation and 13 from Alabama, walked out of the con- vention and formed their own party—the States’ Rights Democratic Party. The Dixiecrats, as they were known, held a one-day convention on July 17, 1948, in Birmingham, Alabama, in which they nominated South Carolina governor STROM THURMOND for president and chose Mississippi governor Fielding L. Wright as their vice- presidential candidate. The States’ Rights Party sought to take votes from both the Democratic and Republican parties by emphasizing the sovereignty of the states and by denouncing Truman and the Democratic Party’s proposed civil rights legislation as an immense threat to the states. In Alabama, the Dixiecrats succeeded in preventing Truman’s name from being placed on the election ballot. The Democratic Party was greatly weakened by the defection of the conservative Dixiecrats and by the liberals who left to join the PROGRESSIVE PARTY , which nominated former vice president and secretary of agriculture Henry A. Wallace to be its presidential candidate. Nevertheless, Presi- dent Harry S. Truman won reelection. Although Truman was reelected over Dewey by a very narrow margin, that vote resulted in the biggest upset in the history of United States presidential campaigns. Strom Thurmond, then-governor of South Carolina, was nominated as the presidential candidate by delegates to the States’ Rights Party Convention held in July 1948. AP IMAGES GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION 358 STATES’ RIGHTS PARTY During the 1948 election, the States’ Rights Party carried South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisi- ana, and Alabama. Thurmond and Wright received approximately 1.2 million votes and 39 electoral votes. The party officially dissolved after the 1948 election, but members of the party remained as an active faction of the Democratic Party. In 1954 Thurmond was elected as a Democratic senator. He joined with other con- servative Democrats (many former Dixiecrats) and used the FILIBUSTER and other political strategies to oppose civil rights legislation. Thur- mond later became a member of the Republican Party. FURTHER READINGS Cohodas, Nadine. 1994. Strom Thurmond & the Politics of Southern Change. Atlanta: Mercer Univ. Press. Frederickson, Kari. 2001. The Dixiecrat Revolt and the End of the Solid South, 1932–1968. Charlotte: Univ. of North Carolina Press. Karabell, Zachary. 2000. The Last Campaign: How Harry Truman Won the 1948 Election. New York: Random House. CROSS REFERENCES CivilRights Acts; Democratic Party; James Strom Thurmond. STATUS The standing, state, or condition of an individual; the rights, obligations, capacities, and incapacities that assign an individual to a given class. For example, the term status is used in reference to the legal state of being an infant, a ward, or a prisoner, as well as in reference to a person’s social standing in the community . STATUS OFFENSE A type of crime that is not based upon prohibited action or inaction but rests on the fact that the offender has a certain personal condition or is of a specified character. Vagrancy—the act of traveling from place to place with no visible means of support—is an example of a STATUS OFFENSE . Another example: In all states, a child can be brought before the juvenile court and charged with “status offenses,” acts that would not be illegal were the youth an adult. Thus, status offenders are children who commit acts which are illegal solely due to their age (status). For example, truancy, curfew violations, underage drinking, and other offenses are traditionally included in this category. STATUS QUO [Latin, The existing state of things at any given date.] Status quo ante bellum means the state of things before the war. The status quo to be preserved by a preliminary injunction is the last actual, peaceable, uncontested status which pre- ceded the pending controversy. STATUTE A statue is an act of a legislature that declares, proscribes, or commands something; it is a specific law, expressed in writing. A statute is a written law passed by a legislature on the state or federal level. Statutes set forth general propositions of law that courts apply to specific situations. A statute may forbid a certain act, direct a certain act, make a decla- ration, or set forth governmental mechanisms to aid society. A statute begins as a bill proposed or sponsored by a legislator. If the bill survives the legislative committee process and is approved by both houses of the legislature, the bill becomes law when it is signed by the executive officer (the president on the federal level or the governor on the state level). When a bill becomes law, the various provisions in the bill are called statutes. The term statute signifies the elevation of a bill from legislative proposal to law. State and federal statutes are compiled in statutory codes that group the statutes by subject. These codes are published in book form and are available at law libraries. Lawmaking powers are vested chiefly in elected officials in the legislative branch. The vesting of the chief lawmaking power in elected lawmakers is the foundation of a representative democracy. Aside from the federal and state constitutions, statutes passed by elected law- makers are the first laws to consult in finding the law that applies to a case. However, legislative power is constrained by constitutional provi- sions against EX POST FACTO LAWS and bills of ATTAINDER. In addition, a legislature may only regulate conduct within the powers enumerated in the U.S. Constitution or a state constitution. Some state legislatures are constrained by con- stitutional provisions and judicial rulings to enact state laws on single subjects rather than through omnibus bills that have been called Christmas tree bills or ga rbage bills. The power of statutes over other forms of laws is not complete, however. Under the U.S. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE 359 Constitution and state constitutions, federal and state governments are comprised of a system of checks and balances among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. As the system of checks and balances plays out, the executive and judicial branches have the opportunity to fashion laws within certain limits. The executive branch may possess certain lawmaking powers under the federal or state constitutions, and the judiciary has the power to review statutes to determine whether they are valid under those constitutions. When a court strikes down a statute, it in effect creates a law of its own that applies to the general public. Laws created through judicial opinion stand in contradistinction to laws created in statutes. CASE LAW has the same legally binding effect as statutory law, but there are important distinc- tions between statutes and case law. Case law is written by judges, not by elected lawmakers, and it is written in response to a specific case before the court. A judicial opinion may be used as precedent for similar cases, however, which means that the judicial opinion in the case will guide the result in similar cases. In this sense, a judicial opinion can constitute the law on certain issues withi n a particular jurisdiction. Courts can establish law in this way when no statute exists to govern a case or when the court interprets a statute. For example, if an appeals court holds that witness testimony on memory recovered through therapy is not admissible at trial, that decision will become the rule for similar cases within the appeals court’s jurisdiction. The decision will remain law until the court reverses itself or is reversed by a higher court, or until the state or federal legislature passes a statute that overrides the judicial decision. If the courts strike down a statute and the legislature passes a similar statute, the courts may have an opportunity to declare the new statute unconstitutional. This cycle can be repeated over and over if legislatures continu- ally test the constitutional limits on their law- making powers. Judicial opinions also provide legal author- ity in cases that are not covered by statute. Legislatures have not passed statutes that govern every conceivable dispute. Furthermore, the language contained in statutes does not cover every possible situation. Statutes may be written in broad terms, and judicial opinions must interpret the language of relevant statutes according to the facts of the case at hand. Regulations passed by administrative agencies also fill in statutory gaps, and courts occasion- ally are called on to interpret regulations as well as statutes. Courts tend to follow a few general rules in determining the meaning or scope of a statute. If a statute does not provide satisfactory defini- tions of ambiguous terms, courts must interpret the words or phrases according to ordinary rules of grammar and dictionary definitions. If a word or phrase is technical or legal, it is interpreted within the context of the statute. For example, the term interest can refer to a monetary charge or ownership of property. If the term interest appears in t he context of a statute on REAL ESTATE ownership, a court will construe the word to mean property ownership. Previous interpretations of similar statutes are also helpful in determining a statute’s meaning. Statutes are not static and irreversible. A statute may be changed or repealed by the lawmaking body that enacted it, or it may be overturned by a court. A statute may lapse, or terminate, under the terms of the statute itself or under legislative rules that automatically terminate statutes unless they are reapproved before a certain amount of time has passed. Although most legal disputes are covered at least in part by statutes, tort and contract disputes are exceptions, in that they are largely governed by case law. CRIMINAL LAW, patent law, tax law, PROPERTY LAW, and BANKRUPTCY law are among the areas of law that are covered first and foremost by statute. CROSS REFERENCES Judicial Review; Legislation; Legislative History; Statutory Construction. STATUTE OF FRAUDS A type of state law, modeled after an old ENGLISH LAW , that requires certain types of contracts to be in writing. U.S. law has adopted a 1677 English law, called the Statute of Frauds, which is a device employed as a defense in a breach of contract lawsuit. Every state has some type of statute of frauds; the law’s purpose is to prevent the possibility of a nonexistent agreement between two parties being “proved” by perjury or FRAUD. This objective is accomplished by prescribing that particular contracts not be enforced unless GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 360 STATUTE OF FRAUDS a written note or memorandum of agreement exists that is signed by the persons bound by the contract’s terms or their authorized repre- sentatives. The statute of frauds is invoked by a defendant in a breach of contract action. If the defendant can establish that the contract he has failed to perform is legally unenforceable because it has not satisfied the requirement of the statute, then the defendant cannot be liable for its breach. For example, suppose that a plaintiff claims that a defendant agreed to pay her a commission for selling his building. If the defendant can demon- strate that no commission contract was signed, the statute of frauds will prevent the plaintiff from recovering the commission. The English Statute of Frauds, which was enacted by Parliament in 1677, applied to only specific types of contracts. These included promises to a creditor of another to pay that individual’s debts when they became due, a marriage contract or promise to marry, other than the mutual promises of a man and woman to wed, a contract for the sale of real estate, and a contract that cannot be performed within one year of its formation and has not been completely performed by one side. States have expanded the application of the statute to other categories of contracts, such as a life insurance contract that is not to be performed within the lifetime of the person making the promise. It also applies to a contract to bequeath or devise property by will and to a contract that authorizes an agent to sell real property for a commission. A strict application of the statute of frauds can produce an unjust result. A party, who in GOOD FAITH believes a contract exists and there- fore spends time and money to perform the contract, would be unable to force the other party to perform because the agreement was not in writing. Therefore, courts often employ the term part perfo rmance to determine whether a plaintiff’s conduct based on her belief that a contract exists justifies enforcement of the contract even though it has failed to comply with the statute of frauds. Part performance refers to acts performed by the plaintiff in reliance on the performance of the duties imposed on the defendant by the terms of the contract. The plaintiff’s actions must be sub- stantial in order to demonstrate that he actually has relied on the terms of the contract. When the alleged contract involves real pro- perty, the acts of taking possession and making part payment—when performed in reliance upon an oral contract under circumstances that clearly show a buyer-seller relationship— are usually sufficient to remove a contract from the requirements of the statute of frauds. The oral contract, therefore, would be enforced. However, payment or posse ssion alone gener- ally will not suffice to overcome the statute of frauds. Where services have been performed based upon a contract that is unenforceable because of the statute of frauds, the value of those services can nevertheless be recovered on the basis of quantum meruit, or the reasonable value of those services. If a person performs services in reliance on an oral promise that he will inherit certain property and that promise is not fulfilled, that individual can sue the decedent’s estate on a QUANTUM MERUIT basis for the reasonable value of his services. If a contract is unenforceable, a person can recover expenses incurred at the other party’s request even though they pertain to the unen- forceable contract. The recovery of expenses is not affected because the law implies a promise by the defendant to pay for expenses incurred at her request, and liability is not based upon breach of contract. If one party has performed in reli ance on an oral contract and will be irreparably harmed if the contract is not enforced, some courts apply the theory of EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL to prevent the statute of frauds from being employed as a defense. Equitable estoppel holds that if a person has so altered his position that justice demands the enforcement of the contract, the court will enforce the contract even though it fails to comply with the statute. FURTHER READINGS Browne, Causten. 1997. A Treatise on the Construction of the Statute of Frauds, as in Force in England and the United States. Holmes Beach, Fla.: Gaunt. Kidwell, John. 2000. “Ruminations on Teaching the Statute of Frauds.” Saint Louis Univ. Law Journal 44 (fall). Randolph, Patrick A., Jr. 2001. “Has E-Sign Murdered the Statute of Frauds?” Probate & Property 15 (July-August). Vietzen, Laurel. 2007. Understanding, Creating, and Imple- menting Contracts. New York: Aspen Publishers. CROSS REFERENCE Quasi Contract. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE OF FRAUDS 361 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS A statute of limitations is a type of federal or state law that restricts the time within which legal proceedings may be brought. Statutes of limitations, which date back to early ROMAN LAW, are a fundamental part of European and U.S. law. These statutes, which apply to both civil and criminal actions, are designed to prevent fraudulent and stale claims from arising after all evidence has been lost or after the facts have become obscure through the passage of time or the defective memory, death, or disappearance of witnesses. An underlying purpose of such statutes is to require the diligent pursuit of known claims, which provides finality and predictability for potential defendants. The statute of limitations is a defense that is ordinarily asserted by the DEFENDANT to defeat an action brought against him after the appropriate time has elapsed. Therefore, the defendant must plead the defense before the court upon answer- ing the plaintiff’s complaint. If the defendant does not do so, he is regarded as having waived the defense and will not be permitted to use it in any subs equent proceedings. Statutes of limitations are enacted by the legislature, which may either extend or reduce the time limits, subject to certain restrictions. A court cannot extend the time period unless the statute provides such authority. With respect to civil lawsuits, a statute must afford a reasonable period in which an action can be brought. A statute of limitations is unconstitutional if it immediately curtails an existing remedy or pro- vides so little time that it deprives an individual of a reasonable opportunity to start a lawsuit. Depending upon the state statute, the parties themselves may either shorten or extend the prescribed time period by agreement, such as a provision in a contract. Criminal Actions A majority of states have a statute of limitations for all crimes except MURDER. Once the statute has expired, the court lacks jurisdiction to try or punish a defendant. Criminal statutes of limitations apply to different crimes on the basis of their general classification as either felonies or misdemeanors. Generally, the time limit starts to run on the date the offense was committed, not from the time the crime was discovered or the accused was identified. The running of the statute may be suspended for any period the accused is absent from the state or, in certain states, while any other INDICTMENT for the same crime is pending. This suspension occurs so that the state will be able to obtain a new indictment in the event the first one is declared invalid. Civil Actions In determining which statute of limitations will control in a CIVIL ACTION, the type of CAUSE OF ACTION under which the claim will be pursued is critical. States establish different deadline s depending on whether the cause of action involves a contract, PERSONAL IN JURY, libel, FRAUD, or other claim. Once the cause of action is determined, the date of the injury mu st be fixed. A cause of action ordinarily arises when the party has a right to apply to the proper court for relief. Some states, for example, require a person to bring a lawsuit for breach of contract within six years from the date the contract was breached. The action cannot be started until the contract has actually been violated, even though serious disagreements between the parties might have occurred earlier. Conversely, the time limit within which to bring an actio n for fraud does not begin until the fraud has been discovered. Waiving the Defense A court cannot force a defendant to use a statute of limitations defense, but it is usually in the person’s best legal interests to do so. Neverthe- less, defendants do sometimes waive the defense. The defense may be waived by an agreement of the parties to the controversy, provided that the agreement is supported by adequate consider- ation. For example, a debtor’s agreement to waive the statute of limitations in exchange for a creditor’s agreement not to sue is VALUABLE CONSIDERATION that prevents the debtor from using the defense. A defendant may be unable to use the limitations defense due to her agreement, con- duct, or representations. To be estopped, or prevented, from using this defense, a defendant need not have signed a written statement, unless required by statute. The defendant must, how- ever, have done something that amounted to an affirmative inducement to the PLAINTIFF to delay bringing the action. Statements that only attempt to discourage a person from bringing GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 362 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS a suit or mere negotiations looking toward an amicable settlement will not estop a defendant from invoking the statute of limitations. Tolling the Statute Statutes of limitations are designed to aid defendants. A plaintiff, however, can prevent the dismissal of his action for untimeliness by seeking to toll the statute. When the statute is tolled, the running of the time period is suspended until some event specified by law takes place. Tolling provisions benefit a plaintiff by extend- ing the time period in which he is permitted to BRING SUIT. Various events or circumstances will toll a statute of limitations. It is tolled when one of the parties is under a legal disability (the lack of legal capacity to do an act) at the time the cause of action accrues. A child or a person with a mental illness is regarded as being incapable of initiating a legal action on her own behalf. Therefore, the time limit will be tolled until some fixed time after the disability has been removed. For example, once a child reaches the AGE OF MAJORITY , the counting of time will be resumed. A personal disability that postpones the opera- tion of the statute against an individual may be asserted only by that individual. If a party is under more than one disability, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until all the disabilities are removed. Once the statute begins to run, it will not be suspended by the subsequent Recovered Memory: Stopping the Clock S B tatutes of limitations are intended to encour- age the re solution of lega l claims within a reasonable amount of time. Courts and legislatures have had to reconsider the purpose of time limits in dealing with the controversial issue of recovered memory by child sexual abuse victims. For t he most part, the clock has been stopped until a victim remembers the abuse. In the 1980s some mental health therapists began exploring the nature of child sexual abuse. They contended that memories of childhood trauma are so disturbing that the child represses them. Many years later, while in therapy or by happen- stance, the person remembers the traumatic events. Therapists built on this concept, working with patients to fully recover these memories. Victims of child sexual abuse who sought to sue their abusers for damages faced a statute of limitations question: Had the time e xpired to file a civil lawsuit because the memory of abuse was not recovered until many years after the actual abuse? Courts that faced this issue for the first time sought ways to circumvent the time barrier. One method was to apply the “discovery rule” found in tort law. The discovery rule appl ies if the injury is one that is not readily perceptible as having an external source. Thus, a person who has serious mental health problems but does not know the cause will be allowed to toll (suspend the running of) the statute of limitations until he or she discovers that the injury was caused by the defendant’stortious conduct. Legislatures have been urged to amend their statutes of l imitations to permit recovered memory plaintiffs to sue their abusers. Between 1989 and 1995, 24 s tates had amended their laws. As of 2009, 28 states had codified some form of a “delayed discovery rule” for recovered-memory sexual abuse cases. Typically recovered-memory laws provide that the action must be filed within a certai n number of years after the plaintiff e ither reaches the age of majority or knew or had reason to know that sexual abuse caused the injury. Because of these judicial and legislative changes, many lawsuits have been filed alleging child sexual abuse that occurred many yearsbefore,sometimesaslongas20yearsearlier. FURTHER READINGS Haaken, Jan. Memory Matters: Contexts for Understanding Sexual Abuse Recollections. New York: Routledge. Isaac, Rael Jean. 2001. “Down Pseudo-Memory Lane.” Priorities for Health 13. CROSS REFERENCES Child Abuse; Sex Offenses; Sexual Abuse. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS 363 disability of any of the parties unless specified by statute. Mere ignorance of the existence of a cause of action generally does not toll the statute of limitations, particularly when the facts could have been learned by inquiry or diligence. In cases where a cause of action has been fraud- ulently concealed, the statute of limitations is tolled until the action is, or could have been, discovered through the exercise of due diligence. Ordinarily, silence or failure to disclose the existence of a cause of action does not toll the statute. The absence of the plaintiff or defen- dant from the jurisdiction does not suspe nd the running of the statute of limitations, unless the statute so provides. The statute of limitations for a debt or obligation may be tolled by either an uncondi- tional promise to pay the debt or an acknowl- edgement of the debt. The time limitation on bringing a lawsuit to enforce payment of the debt is suspended until the time for payment established under the promise or acknowledg- ment has arrived. Upon that due date, the period of limitations will start again. FURTHER READINGS Corman, Calvin W. 1991. Limitation of Actions. Boston: Little, Brown. Lazo, Joy. 1995. “True or False: Expert Testimony on Repressed Memory.” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 28 (June). Levy, Adolph J. 1987. Solving Statute of Limitations Problems. New York: Kluwer Law. STATUTE OF USES An ENGLISH LAW enacted in 1535 to end the practice of creating uses in real property by changing the purely equitable title of those entitled to a use into absolute ownership with the right of possession. The Statute of Uses was a radical statute forced through a recalcitrant English Parliament in 1535 by a willful King Henry VIII. Essentially, the statute eliminated a sleight of hand that had been fashioned by landholders to avoid paying royal fees associated with land. These roya l fees, called feudal incidents, had been slipping away from the Crown for a century or so before the statute was passed. Landholders in sixteenth-century England were supposed to hold their land at the will of a lord, who worked in the service of the king or queen. In exchange for the land, landholders were obliged to pay certain fees to the lord, who kept some and turned the rest over to the Crown. Many of the royal in cidents associated with real property were exacted by the Crown when the landholder died. However, the Crown could collect incidents only if the legal title passed from the landholder to an heir. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, landholders had devised a way to both profit from their land and avoid feudal incidents. The landholders would place their prop erty in the name of one person for the benefit of a third party. This third party, called the cestui que use, the beneficiary of the use, was either the original landholder or a person of the landholder’s choosing. The arrangement created a form of land ownership, or estate in land, called a use. Soon courts began to recognize the right of a landholder, as feoffor, to give possession of his land to a peasant tenant while giving legal title to a third party, or feoffee. They also enforced agreements between a feoffor and feoffee in which the feoffee held title to the land only for the benefit of the cestui que use. Under the COMMON LAW, when legal title to land was held by more than one feoffee, partial title did not pass to the deceased feoffee’s heirs upon the death of a feoffee. Instead, the deceased feoffee’s portion of the title passed to the other feoffees. A landholder, as a feoffor, could give legal title to several feoffees and add a new feoffee to the legal title upon the death of any feoffee. Under this system, the death of a title-holding feoffee did not give rise to an inheritance incident. Thus, a landholder could avoid feudal incidents while he himself or a person of his choosing continued to reap profits from the land. By giving legal title to two or more feoffees, a feoffor also was able to avoid other royal incidents, such as marriage fees and other fees associated with the death of a landholder. If the property was held in other persons’ names, a landholder could also avoid losing the property due to debt or felony conviction. By the end of the fifteenth century, almost all of the land in England was owned in use. Because most of the land was owned by a relatively small number of wealthy landowners, in most cases the actual title owners did not actually live on their parcels of land. Another consequence was that the GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 364 STATUTE OF USES Crown had lost substantial revenues due to the avoidance of the land-based feudal incidents. King Henry VIII attempted to reclaim these lost revenues with the passage of the Statute of Uses. Under the act, the full title to land was automatically given to the person for whom the property was being used, the cestui que use. The act also reinstated the old feudal rule of primogeniture, which held that land should go to the oldest son up on the death of the landowner. Landholders strenuously objected to the statute. Over the next four years they conducted a Pilgrimage of Grace to London in an effort to convince the king and Parliament to eliminat e primogeniture and reverse the ABOLITION of the use estate. The campaig n caused Henry VIII to loosen the royal grip on land ownership. In 1540 Parliament passed the Statute of Wills, which abolished primogeniture and gave landholders the right to devise their property to whomever they pleased in a written will and testament. However, Parliament did not abolish the Statute of Uses. Immediately after the act was passed, land- holders set about creating loopholes. The courts also were hostile to the legislation. They accom- modated landholders by giving the statute a strict technical construction and by expanding other methods for landholders to put their property in the name of another person while keeping it for their own use or profit or for the use or profit of another person. In particular, the English courts expanded the concept of the trust to fill the void. A land trust is an arrangement whereby one person holds full title to property for the benefit of another person, who may direct the management and use of the property. Courts focused on the difference between a trust and a use to achieve essentially the same result for landowners. In a trust the title owner plays some active role in connection with the use of the property. In contrast, with a bare use, the feoffee performed no work in connection with the property and served only as a straw- person. If a feoffee was performing duties in connection with the property, the land was not in use, courts reasoned, but in trust. Many of the rulesonlandtruststhatdevelopedinresponseto the Statute of Uses were adopted in the United States and continue in effect in the early twenty- first century. In 1660 Parliament abolished all remaining feudal incidents associated with land in the Statute of Tenure. This obviated the need for a Statu te of Uses because there no longer was any need to evade feudal incidents. The Statute of Uses was finally repealed by Parliament in 1925 by the Law of Pro perty Act (12 & 13 Geo. 5, ch. 16, sec. 1(7)). FURTHER READINGS Baade, Hans W. 1994. “The Casus Omissus: A Pre-History of Statutory Analogy.” Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 20. Haar, Charles M., and Lance Liebman. 2008. Property and Law. 2d ed. Los Altos, CA: Indo American Books. Holmes, William J. 1995. “The Evolution of the Trust: A Creative Solution to Trustee Liability under CERCLA.” Villanova Environmental Law Journal 6. Kurtz, Sheldon F., and Herbert Hovenkamp. 2007. Cases and Materials on American Property Law. 5th ed. St. Paul, Minn.: Thomson/West. Reid, Charles J. 1995. “The Seventeenth-Century Revolution in the English Land Law.” Cleveland State Law Review 43. Zschau, Julius J. and Ulysses Clayborn. 2009. “Using Land Trusts to Prevent Small Farmer Land Loss.” Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal 44 (fall). CROSS REFERENCE Feudalism. STATUTE OF WILLS An early ENGLISH LAW that provided that all individuals who owned land were permitted to leave or devise two-thirds of their property to anyone by written will and testament, effective upon their death. The Statute of Wills (32 Hen. 8, c. 1) gave to landowners in England the right to dispose of land through a written will. Before the Statute of Wills was enacted by the English Parliament in 1540, landowners did not have the right to determine who would become the new owner of the land upon their death. The inheritance of land was dependent on whether the deceased landowner was survived by a competent relative or descendant. Generally, if a landowner died with no relatives, the land reverted into the possession of the Crown. This reversion was called ESCHEAT. The Statute of Wills made it possible for a landholder to decide who would inherit the land upon his death. The statute was passed a mere four years after the STATUTE OF USES banned the practice of splitting the title to land to avoid paying royal fees associated with the property. The Statute of Wills was seen as a policy retreat by King Henry VIII, who faced tremendous GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE OF WILLS 365 opposition from landowners seeking relief from royal control of land. Some of the procedures created by the Statute of Wills remain effective in modern law. The statute req uired that wills be in writing, that they be signed by the person making the will, or testator, and that they be properly witnessed by other persons. If any of these requirements was not met, the will could not be enforced in court. These requirements currently exist in state law and are intended to ensure that wills are not fabricated and that the testator’s intent is fulfilled. FURTHER READING Kurtz, Sheldon F., and Herbert Hovenkamp. 2007. Cases and Materials on American Property Law. 5th ed. St. Paul, Minn.: Thomson/West. STATUTE OF YORK An ENGLISH LAW enacted in 1318 that required the consent of Parliament in all legislative ma tters. The Statute of York was an important step toward the development of a constitutional monarchy in England. The law was enacted in the city of York in 1318, at a time when King Edward II was attempting to reass ert his control over the kingdom. Historians generally regard Edward II as an unqualified failure as king. Seven years before the Statute of York, the nobility had forced him to accept the Ordinances of 1311, which required baronial consent for foreign war, restricted the Crown’s power to interfere with the judicial system, and required the king to obtain the advice and consent of the barons in Parliament for a long list of officials he wished to appoint. Edward II regained political strength in 1318 and managed to have the Ordinances repealed. The Statute of York, however, speci- fied that the “consent of the prelates, earls, and barons, and of the community of the realm” was required for legislation. Though some his- torians believe the statute restored baronial control over Englis h government, many histor- ians see the phrase “community of the realm” as signifying a shift of power to those outside the noble class. In addition, the powers of the king were constrained. FURTHER READING Haskins, George Lee. 1935. The Statute of York and the Interest of the Commons. Reprint,, 1977. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. STATUTES AT LARGE An official compilation of the acts and resolutions of each session of Congress published by the Office of the Federal Register in the National Archives and Record Service. The Statutes at Large are divided into two parts: the first is composed of public acts and joint resolutions; the second includes private acts and joint resolutions, concurrent resolu- tions, treaties, proposed and ratified amendments to the Constitution, and presidential proclama- tions. Volum es from 1951 to the present are arranged by public law number; older volumes are arranged by chapter number. The Statutes at Large are considered the official publication of the law for citation pur- poses when titles of the United States Code have not been enacted as positiv e law. STATUTORY Created, defined, or relating to a statute; required by statute; conforming to a statute. A statutory penalty, for example, is punish- ment in the form of a fine, prison sente nce, or both, that is imposed against an offender for committing some statutory violation. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION See CANONS OF CONSTRUCTION. STATUTORY INTERPRETATION See CANONS OF CONSTRUCTION. STATUTORY RAPE Sexual intercours e by an adult with a person below a statutorily designated age. The criminal offense of statutory rape is committed when an adult has sexual intercourse with a person who, under the law, is incapable of consenting to sex. Minors and physically and mentally incapacitated persons are deemed incapable of consenting to sex under rape statutes in all states. These persons are consid- ered deserving of special protection because they are especially vulnerable due to their youth or condition. Most legislatures include statutory rape provisions in statutes that punish a number of different types of sexual ASSAULT. Statutory rap e is different from other types of rape in that force GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 366 STATUTE OF YORK and lack of actual consent are not necessary for conviction. A DEFENDANT may be convicted of statutory rape even if the COMPLAINANT explicitly consented to the sexual contact and no force was used by the actor. By contrast, other rape generally occurs when a person overcomes another person by force and without the person’s consent. The actor’s age is an important factor in statutory rape where the offense is based on the victim’s age. Furthermore, a defendant may not argue that he or she was mistaken as to the minor’s age or incapacity. Most rape statutes specify that a rape occurs when the complainant is under a certain age and the perpetrator is over a certain age. In Minnesota, for example, crimi- nal sexual conduct in the first degree is defined as sexual contact with a person under 13 years of age by a person who is more than 36 months older than the victim. The offense also is committed if the complainant is between 13 and 16 years old and the actor is more than 48 months older than the complainant (Minn. Stat. Ann. § 609.342 [West 1996]). Wisconsin’s statutory rape laws are unusual in that they not only prohibit sexual conduct between an adult and an underage victim, but also criminalize all sexual conduct involving underage persons, even when that conduct involves peers and is fully consensual. Thus, any time a person under the age of 16 in Wisconsin engages in an act that is more sexually intimate than a kiss, a felony has been committed. Should both partners be underage, then by the same act each partner is simultaneously a victim and a perpetrator. Enforcement of these laws when both victim and perpetrator are underage has been uneven at best, and politically divisive at worst. FURTHER READING Cocca, Carolyn E. 2004. Jailbait: The Politics of Statutory Rape Laws in the United States. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press. CROSS REFERENCES Child Abuse; Sexual Abuse. STATUTORY REDEMPTION The right granted by legislation to a mortgagor, one who pledges property as security for a debt, as well as to certain others, to recover the mortgaged property after a foreclosure sale. Statutory redemption is the right of a mortgagor to regain ownership of property after foreclosure. A mortgagor is a person or party who borrows money from a mortgagee to purchase property. The arrangement between a mortgagor and mortgagee is called a mortgage. Foreclosure is the termination of rights to property bought with a mortgage. Most fore- closures occur when the mortgagor fails to make mortgage payments to the mortgagee. After foreclosing a mortgage, the mortgagee may sell the property at a foreclosure sale. Statutory redemption gives a mortgagor a certain period of time, usually one year, to pay the amount that the property was sold for at the foreclosure sale. If the mortgagor pays all of the foreclosure sale pricebeforetheendofoneyearafterthefore- closure sale, or within the statutory redemption period, the mortgagor can keep the prop erty. A mortgagor in a state that offers statutory redemption may stay on the premises after foreclosure during the statutory redemption period. If the mortgagor does not redeem the property by the end of the period, the purchaser at the foreclosure sale receives title to, and possession of, the property. In states that have redemption statutes, an individual mortgagor cannot waive a statutory redemption period. Many states that offer statu- tory redemption make a special exception for corporations, which may waive the statutory redemption period if it is incompatible with the reorganization or dissolution of the corporation. Approximately half of al l states have passed statutes that allow mortgagors to redeem prop- erty after a mortgage foreclosure. The states that allow statutory redemption have done so to drive up foreclosure sale prices for the benefit of both the defaulting mortgagor and creditors of the mortgagor who have obtained an interest in the property. Statutory redemption is designed to prevent extremely low sale prices by giving the mortgagor an opportunity to match the sale price. Some legal commentators have observed, however, that statutory redemption has failed to increase the amount of bids on foreclosed property because title to property that is subject to statutory redemption is so uncertain. Because the mortgagor could redeem the property within a year and creditors of the mortgagor could make claims to the property, potential buyers of foreclosed property adjust their bids to account for these hazards. Statutory redemption is distinct from equi- table redemption. Equitable redemption is the GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTORY REDEMPTION 367 . REFERENCE Quasi Contract. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE OF FRAUDS 361 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS A statute of limitations is a type of federal or state law that restricts the. Abuse; Sex Offenses; Sexual Abuse. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS 363 disability of any of the parties unless specified by statute. Mere ignorance of the existence. tremendous GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION STATUTE OF WILLS 365 opposition from landowners seeking relief from royal control of land. Some of the procedures created by the Statute of