(A) The plaintiff(s) and defendant(s) in a lawsuit. (B) contracts. Those persons who engage themselves to do, or not to do the matters and things contained in an agreement. 2. All persons generally can be parties to contracts, unless they labor under some disability. 3. Consent being essential to all valid contracts, it follows that persons who want, first, understanding; or secondly, freedom to exercise their will, cannot be parties to contracts. Thirdly, persons who in consequence of their situation are incapable to enter into some particular contract. These will be separately considered. 4. Section 1. Those persons who want understanding, are idiots and lunatics; drunkards and infants, 5. 1. The contracts of idiots and lunatics, are not binding; as they are unable from mental infirmity, to form any accurate judgment of their actions; and consequently, cannot give a serious and sufficient consideration to any engagement. And although it was formerly a rule that the party could not stultify himself.
Law Dictionary – Alternative Legal Definition
The persons who take part In the performance of any act or who are directly interested in any affair, contract, or conveyance, or who are actively concerned in the prosecution and defense of any legal proceeding. See also Pabty. In the Roman civil law, the parties were designated as “actor” and “reus.” In the common law, they are called “plaintiff” and “defendant ;” in real actions, “demandant” and “tenant;” in equity, “complainant” or “plaintiff” and “defendant;” in Scotch law, “pursuer” and “defender;” in admiralty practice, “libelant” and “respondent;” in appeals, “appellant” and “respondent” sometimes, “plaintiff in error” and “defendant in error;’ in criminal proceedings, “prosecutor” and “prisoner.” Classification. Formal parties are those who have no interest in the controversy between the immediate litigants, but have an interest in the subject matter which may be conveniently settled in the suit and thereby prevent further litigation; they may be made parties or not, at the option of the complainant. Chadbourne r. Coe, 51 Fed. 479, 2 C. C. A. 327.Necessary parties are those parties who have such an interest in the subject matter of a suit in equity, or whose rights are so involved in the controvrsy, that ancomplete and effective decree can be made, disposing of the matters in issue and dispensing complete justice, unless they are before the court in such a manner as to entitle them to be heard in vindication or protection of their interests. Nominal parties are those who are joined as plaintiffs or defendants, not because they have any real interest ^ in the subject matter or because any relief is demanded as against them, but merely because the technical rules of pleading require their presence on the record. It should be noted that some courts make a further distinction between “necessary” parties and “indispensable” parties. Thus, it is said that the supreme court of the United States divides parties in equity suits into three different classes: (1) Formal parties, who have no interest in the controversy between the immediate litigants, but have such an interest in the subject matter as may be conveniently settled in the suit, and thereby prevent further litigation; (2) necessary parties, who have an interest in the controversy, but whose interests are separable from those of the parties before the court, and will not be directly affected by a decree which does complete and full justice between them; (3) indispensable parties, who not only have an interest in the subject matter of the controversy, but an interest of such a nature that a final decree cannot be made without either affecting their interests or leaving the contrbversy in such a condition that its final determination may be wholly inconsistent with equity and