Is there any empirical evidence that legal entities actually exist?

[Famspear]

Neutrino is a bad metaphor.....

Oh, no, no! Neutrino is a very good metaphor.

He's just a very bad wizard......

[Famspear]

But, Neutrino had his moments.

Neutrino wasn't much of a wizard, but was my dog. And he could sing and drink me under the table, that's for sure. I remember him now, just as though it were only yesterday........

Oh, I once had a dog called Neutrino
Who could sing! And sound almost like Dino!
I could only rejoice
At his baritone voice
In that show at the Vegas casino!

[bmxninja357]

I'm looking for actual evidence juridical persons or judicial persons in fact exist.

this coming from someone who can present no evidence they do not exist.....

ninj

[arayder]

There are two problems with the unstated conclusion to which we might assume our new friend is headed.

The first being that if all ideas or theories containing subjective conceptual elements are invalid then common law itself is no more valid than the Easter Bunny.

The second and greatest problem is that despite our new friend's inference that the concept of natural persons, although equally subjective, is real natural persons are nevertheless subject to the rule of law. . .and have been so since the dawn of modern English law.

[notorial dissent]

I would ask our learned friend just what he believes constitutes empirical evidence?

[wserra]

I would ask our learned friend just what he believes constitutes empirical evidence?

Yeah, that's the question that best cuts through the Stevens nonsense. They never answer it, because the reality is that they won't accept anything.

[bmxninja357]

the reality is that they won't accept anything.

sure they will. they accept welfare and public health care.....

ninj

[The Observer]

the reality is that they won't accept anything.

sure they will. they accept welfare and public health care.....

ninj

For that matter, they accept FRNs and spend them like crazy, despite their belief that FRNs are not money.

[AndyK]

Empirical: Relying on or derived from observation or experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis

Thus, experiments and observations as to the treatment by law of corporations, governmental entities, churches, partnerships, charities, and so on would yield the result that legal entities -- distinct from flesh-and-blood people -- do, in fact exist.

QED

Close the thread.

[Pottapaug1938]

Empirical: Relying on or derived from observation or experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis

Thus, experiments and observations as to the treatment by law of corporations, governmental entities, churches, partnerships, charities, and so on would yield the result that legal entities -- distinct from flesh-and-blood people -- do, in fact exist.

QED

Close the thread.

Seconded. Leaving this thread open can produce nothing of value.

[AndyK]

Since the OP has pulled a "Brave Sir Robin," the thread is hereby closed (subject to reopening should the issue be brought up again)

LOCKED

Admin note: If the OP does register, I will unlock the thread. It's only been 24 hours. OP should PM wserra.

[Rad Dude]

What is the empirical evidence that the "legal entities" called "juristic persons" or "juridical persons" exist?

In another thread I asked the question of weather there was actually any empirical evidence that the "legal entities" called "juridical persons" actually exist. Several posters responded but only Andy k actually provided a responsive answer, although he didn't actually specifically cite any specific evidence. He says that "treatment by law" yields that there is empirical evidence. Ok, if that is true, then what specifically is that empirical evidence? In the Indian Courts Hindu deities are treated as "legal entities" and "juridical persons" who can sue and be sued. The Kentucky constitution postulates that there is an entity called "God". The legislative code of the Levites postulates a supreme being called "Yahweh." I know the authoritative texts that lawyers call "the law" postulates that there are "legal entities" called "juridical persons" such as the "juridical person" or "Legal "Entity" called "Lord Ram" (Calcutta High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Jogendra Nath Naskar And Anr. on 5 April, 1963, Ayodhya Dispute ) or the "juridical person" or "legal entity" called "The United States" (United States v Cooper Corp), also called "The Federal State" (Montevideo treaty), or "National Sovereign"(Scalia, Arizona v US) but is there actually any empirical evidence for the existence of these "entities" or do people believe in them because of written dogmas taken as articles of faith?

---- ----
"Thus, experiments and observations as to the treatment by law of corporations, governmental entities, churches, partnerships, charities, and so on would yield the result that legal entities -- distinct from flesh-and-blood people -- do, in fact exist." -andyK
---- ----

Ok? What observations specifically? What experiments, specifically?


WHAT IS EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE?

eric was the only one who provided evidence of a legal entity, which he defined his cat to be. The evidence he cited was an auditory empirical observation of his cat moving around. What I'm specifically looking for empirical evidence like this for "juridical persons". If you're not clear about empirical evidence, I also provided some of the empirical evidence of "Neutrinos" involving empirical observances made by scientists. Here's a tip: empirical evidence involves a tangible who/what/when/where. Someone saw something. Someone heard something. Someone smelled sulfur burning, etc. An eyewitness report. An empirical measurement or observance. A photograph. A sound recording. An artifact dug up that you can look at. A microscope slide. A video. Something tangible, not just a dogma or opinion/conclusion. I would especially like to see a photo of a "Juridical Person" if possible.

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR JURIDICAL PERSONS?

Andy k says that observances and experiments yield that they exist so what are those observances and experiments, specifically? Or is this belief in these "entities" based on faith in the authoritative written dogmas of a faith-based belief system rather than empirical evidence? Please, if you are going to respond, please stay on-topic and responsively answer the questions:

1. Is there any empirical evidence for "legal entities" called "juridical persons" do in fact exist? Or is the belief in these "entities" a faith-based belief, rather than evidence-based?
2. If there is evidence, What is that evidence, specifically?

Thanks in advance for sharing your expertise.

[Arthur Rubin]

Moderator note: Moved to appropriate forum. No comment on whether it should also be locked as being without content.

[Jeffrey]

This is literally a re-post of the other thread that got locked.

[AndyK]

To condense the post down to its meaningful content:

"blah, blah, blah, same old crap"

let it stew for a while then lock it -- and every subsequent attempt until what's his face registers

[bmxninja357]

i have proof. i have seen many 'legal entities' with my own eyes. touched them. watched them sign their name. in fact here is a site all about legal, and its many entities.

http://www.legal.ca/

guess next time you should define legal too.

as a fun point i have stood on the corner of legal and menard.

51st, 50 ave, legal, alberta. the sign on the corner is menard and legal. its on street view.

what do i win for proving legal entities exist?

peace,
ninj

[Burnaby49]

I checked your intersection but couldn't see Menard on a sign. This whole dicussion is really pointless. Sone troll posted a totally meaningless question once and it's like coughing at the top of a snowy mountain. All of a sudden there's an avalanche of posts and the troll sits back and enjoys the fuss. When it's locked he just posts the question again.

Back to Peter of England. I'm trying to get a new discussion of him started today.

[NYGman]

Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation. This data is recorded and analyzed by scientists and is a central process as part of the scientific method.

I can observe a Legal Entities Formation Document, I can observe the Certificate of formation issued by the State of incorporation or formation. I can observe bank accounts in the Corporation name, I can observe a TAX ID number issued to a Legal Entity, I can observe products and services offered by said legal entities, I can see contracts in the name of a legal entity, I can see investments made in the name of legal entities, entered into by a legal entity on behalf of the legal entity, for the benefit of a legal entity. Owners of a legal entity may hold agreements, stock Certificates, partnership agreements, etc. I can view the name of the entity on a Corporate Listings. I can TIN Match an entity, and confirm if their name, address matches the number issued.

so as far as available empirical evidence, there is plenty if you choose to look, and understand what a legal entity is. a Legal entity is an entity that exists under the law. It isn't a real person, if that is what you are after, but it may have similar rights to a real person, in some instances. There may also be some real people who could be ultimately liable for actions of their legal entity, and sometimes you can actually have a legal entity that is disregarded for some purposes but not others.

[AndyK]

However, if one has a burr up his butt about non-flesh-and-blood legal entities, no amount of explanation, reference to examples, or citation of laws will dislodge that burr.

Troll du jour has predetermined that nothing offered in response to his challenge will be acceptable.

Further discussion is futile and constitutes abuse of electrons.

Thus, thread is again LOCKED until troll registers, posts in the appropriate sub-forum, and participates in whatever discussion ensues.