Decisions by the Supreme Court in the 1960senhanced the due process rights of individuals under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amend-ments.. In Mathews, the Court ruled that administrativ
Trang 1because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin In addition, an employer cannot fire an employee who is exercising certain rights, such
as filing a discrimination complaint with a governmental agency or filing for worker’s compensation benefits
An employee can be discharged for mis-appropriating funds, being unfaithful to his or her employer’s interest, refusing to perform services that were agreed upon in a contract, or for being habitually late or absent An employee cannot be fired for insubordination for refusing
to subscribe to unlawful directives from his or her employer, nor can the employee be required
to perform such illegal tasks as committing perjury or handling stolen property A suit for damages may be brought against an employer who wrongfully discharges an employee
An employee has the obligation to be honest and faithful in the performance of duties When trade secrets are disclosed to an employee, he or she must not reveal them to others either prior
or subsequent to employment In some cases,
an employment contract specifies that the employer owns any new ideas or inventions created by the employee during the period of employment When this is true, the employee has no rights in the idea or invention nor any right to ask for additional compensation
Compensation
An employee can enter into an agreement to work without compensation, but in the absence
of such an agreement, an employer must pay an employee at the agreed rate The employer cannot delay payment of wages or substitute something other than money unless the em-ployee assents The emem-ployee is entitled to his
or her wages as long as the work is completed If
an employer wrongfully discharges an
employ-ee, the employee can collect all the money the employer had agreed to pay him or her
The amount and type of compensation is ordinarily regulated by agreement; however, it is affected by a number of statutes Employers are required to pay at least a certain prescribed
must be no less than the amount set by federal law, unless it is a type of employment that is excluded under the law or the employer is small enough in size to be exempt from the minimum wage laws Other state and federal laws mandate employers to allow for paid sick time and
additional wages for overtime or holiday work
It constitutes a violation of federal law, the Equal Pay Act (29 U.S.C.A § 206[1963]) to pay men and women different wages for substan-tially similar work Special laws protect INFANTS
(individuals under the age of majority) by restricting the hours they can work at certain ages and proscribing their employment in certain kinds of jobs
CROSS REFERENCES Child Labor Laws; Employment at Will; Employment Law; Labor Law; Labor Union.
MATERIAL Important; affecting the merits of a case; causing a particular course of action; significant; substantial
A description of the quality of evidence that possesses such substantial PROBATIVE value as to establish the truth or falsity of a point in issue in a lawsuit
A material fact is an occurrence, event, or information that is sufficiently significant to influence an individual into acting in a certain way, such as entering into a contract In formal court procedures, a material fact is anything needed to prove one party’s case, or tending to establish a point that is crucial to a person’s position
A material issue is a question that is in dispute between two parties involved in liti-gation, and that must be answered in order for the conflict to be resolved
A material witness is a person whose testimony is a necessary element of a lawsuit
An individual who is considered a material witness can be compelled to appear in court and provide testimony In the event that the person’s safety is endangered as a result of his
or her planned or actual testimony, he or she may be given legal protection or held in
MATHEWS V ELDRIDGE TEST
A three-part test that determines whether an individual has received DUE PROCESS under the Constitution The test balances (1) the importance
of the interest at stake; (2) the risk of an erroneous deprivation of the interest because of the proce-dures used, and the probable value of additional procedural safeguards; and (3) the government’s interest
498 MATERIAL
Trang 2Decisions by the Supreme Court in the 1960s
enhanced the due process rights of individuals
under both the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amend-ments Aggrieved individuals used these
pre-cedents to litigate various issues involving the
termination of employment, government
bene-fits, professional licensure, and other interests
involvingADMINISTRATIVE LAWmatters As a result,
the Supreme Court had to sort out how much
process was enough to constitute due process
The Court resolved this issue in Mathews v
Eldridge, 425 U.S 319, 96 S.Ct 893, 47 L.Ed.2d
18 (1976), when it announced a three-part
when analyzing procedural due process cases
In Mathews, the plaintiff accused the federal
government of terminating his SOCIAL SECURITY
disability benefits without an evidentiary
hear-ing prior to termination The claim was that
the administrative procedures in place by the
government violated his constitutional right to
due process The Court acknowledged that the
receipt of benefits was an important private
interest, which satisfies the first part of the test
focusing on whether or not a private interest
is at stake Later court decisions have shown
that this part of the test is subjective, calling on
courts to make judgment calls on the relative
merit of the interest at stake
The second part of the test assesses the risk
of the possibility that a person will be mistakenly
deprived of the interest because of the need for
additional or different procedural safeguards If
the risk of error is minimal, then the need for
additional procedures declines If the risk is high
then additional procedures would be merited
Government agencies also may reduce the risk of
erroneous deprivation by ensuring that
regula-tions are notARBITRARYor discriminatory, and by
defining reasonable classifications In Mathews,
the Court ruled that administrative procedures
that were in place did not violate due process
rights; the plaintiff was offered several methods
to address the termination of benefits, but did
not choose to employ them
The final part of the test deals with the
government’s interest The Mathews court,
however, made it clear that in addition to
interest, administrative burdens also must be
factored into the analysis If the need for
enhanced due process is merited by the need
to assure individuals that administrative actions
are just, then administrative costs should not
be considered However, if the costs of the additional procedures outweigh the benefits, then the government should not be required to use additional resources The courts give“substantial weight to the good-faith judgments” of officials charged with government administration In Mathews, the Court ruled that an evidentiary hearing was not required prior to the termination
of benefits and, therefore, the government’s administrative procedures did not violate his due process rights
Some commentators have criticized the three-part test as too subjective and impres-sionistic, allowing judges to impose their personal values on the relative worth of private and government interests For example, in its ruling in Mathews the Court commented that
“the fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard ‘at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.’” Such undefined terminology opens the door for an array of interpretations Supporters, however, contend that the balancing of the three parts gives courts flexibility in assessing a particular set of facts Nevertheless, the test continues to
be applied by the Supreme Court and the lower courts
FURTHER READINGS Carnathan, Sean T 1993 “Due Process and the Independent Medical Examiner System in the Maine Workers ’ Compensation Act ” Maine Law Review 45.
Mashaw, Jerry L 1976 “The Supreme Court’s Due Process Calculus for Administrative Adjudication in Mathews v.
Eldridge: Three Factors in Search of a Theory of Value.”
Univ of Chicago Law Review 44.
Schwartz, Bernard 1995 A History of the Supreme Court 2d
ed New York: Oxford Univ Press.
MATTER OF FACT That which is to be determined by the senses or by the testimony of witnesses who describe what they have perceived through the senses of sight, smell, touch, taste, and hearing
Trials are highly complex forums for the consideration of fact, opinion, and law Each area is distinct in its type and in who has responsibility for evaluating it Courts use the term matter of fact to distinguish a particular kind of information A fact is a thing done—an actual occurrence or event—and it is presented during a trial in the form of testimony and evidence TheRULES OF EVIDENCE generally allow witnesses to testify as to what they personally know about the facts in dispute, but do not
MATTER OF FACT 499
Trang 3allow witnesses to testify as to their opinions (i.e., thoughts, beliefs, or inferences) in regard
to those facts An exception is made for expert witnesses, whose technical or scientific specialty
is considered sufficient to allow them to state their opinion on relevant and material matters
Facts are often difficult to ascertain because the record is unclear or because competing interpretations of the facts are presented.
their validity in reaching a verdict The jury’s role is kept distinct from that of the court, which has the authority to rule on all matters of law
CROSS REFERENCE Matter of Law.
MATTER OF LAW That which is determined or ascertained through the use of statutes, rules, court decisions, and interpretations of legal principles
In legal actions the term matter of law is used
to define a particular area that is the responsi-bility of the court Matter of law is distinguished from matter of fact All questions concerning the determination of fact are for the jury, though a judge may determine the facts if a jury trial is waived or is not permitted under the law
The designation of matters of law to the judge and matters of fact to the jury did not develop, however, until the late eighteenth century Until that time a jury could exercise its judgment over matters of fact and law Jury instructions, which
in modern law are technical and specific about which law to apply, were informal and general A jury was free to accept the instructions, modify them, or ignore them completely
By the middle of the nineteenth century, courts had acquired authority over matters of law and confined juries to matters of fact
Commercial lawyers were particularly influen-tial in bringing about this change, as greater judicial control over matters of law helped produce a stable legal system in which business could prosper
In the early twenty-first century, courts rule
on all matters of law, including pretrial motions, trial objections to the introduction
of particular evidence or testimony, proposed jury instructions, and posttrial motions Their decisions are based on statutes,RULES OF EVIDENCE
and procedure, and the body of relevant case law
When the facts in a civil action are not in dispute, one or both of the parties may request a court to make a SUMMARY JUDGMENT Summary judgment is purely a matter of law; the court accepts the relevant facts as presented by the party opposing summary judgment and renders a decision based on the applicable legal principles
A matter of law can be the basis for an appeal, but generally a matter of fact cannot Though an appeals court can reverse a decision because of a mistaken matter of law, it will not reverse if the mistake did not affect the verdict This “harmless error” rule developed, in part, from the recognition that during a trial the court often must make hundreds of decisions based on matters of law
MATTER OF RECORD Anything that has been entered in the formal written record of a court, which can be proved by the production of that record
A court produces a lengthy written record of
a trial A matter of record is anything entered in the official court record, including pleadings, testimony, evidence, motions, objections, rul-ings, and the verdict Any matter of record can
be proved by producing the relevant document from the trial court record
Proving matters of record is especially important in petitions for appeal When appellate courts determine whether to hear an appeal, the existence of a matter of record can be decisive: the record can conclusively refute allegations con-tained in the petition Thus, for example, an appeal based on something said in testimony must be supported by the record; if it is not, the court may deny the petition without any further consideration An appellate court in most instances will not consider evidence, issues, or objections that were not made a part of the record
at trial Getting an issue into the record at trial is said to preserve the issue for appeal
In general, matters of record are available to the public unless state law or court order prevents them from being released For exam-ple, courts typically refuse to release the names
of minors who are victims of sexual assault Rhode Island’s family court rules of practice provide another example; matters of record
“involving scandal or immoral practices” are kept private except from the parties in interest
or their representatives (R.I R Fam Ct Prac Rule 3.3)
500 MATTER OF LAW
Trang 4vMATTHEWS, STANLEY
Stanley Matthews served as associate justice
of the U.S Supreme Court from 1881 to 1889
A longtime friend and adviser to President
effective and hardworking member of the Court
during his brief tenure His 1859 prosecution of
a reporter for aiding the escape of two fugitive
slaves proved politically embarrassing in later
years However, his opinion in YICK WO V
220 (1886), established an enduring principle of
Matthews was born July 21, 1824, in
Cincinnati He preferred his middle name and
dropped his first name, Thomas, in his adult
life He graduated from Kenyon College in 1840
and then studied law in Cincinnati He was
admitted to the Tennessee bar in 1842 and
began a law practice in Columbia, Tennessee
Matthews also devoted himself to journalism,
editing the Tennessee Democrat newspaper He
returned to Ohio in 1845 to become editor of
the Cincinnati Morning Herald
Soon Matthews was drawn into politics and
public service He became clerk of the Ohio
House of Representatives in 1848, then left in
1851 to sit as judge on the court of COMMON
to the Ohio Senate in 1855, where he served
until 1857
Matthews was appointed U.S attorney for
the Southern District of Ohio in 1858 In 1859
he prosecuted W B Connelly, a local reporter,
under the federalFUGITIVE SLAVE ACT, for assisting
two runaway slaves Though Matthews was an
abolitionist, he duly enforced the law Critics charged him with forsaking his conscience in the hope of furthering his legal and political careers Matthews never escaped the taint of these accusations
When the Civil War broke out, Matthews enlisted in the Twenty-third Ohio Infantry as a lieutenant colonel, under the command of Hayes, a college classmate and friend He left the army in 1863, following his election as a judge of the Cincinnati Superior Court He held that post until 1865, when he resumed his private law practice
Matthews aided his friend Hayes in the 1876 presidential election, againstSAMUEL J.TILDEN, the
1858 Appointed U.S Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio
1824 Born,
Cincinnati,
Ohio
1851–53 Served as judge on court of common pleas in Hamilton County, Ohio
1842 Admitted to Tennessee bar
1845 Became editor of
Cincinnati Morning Herald
1855–57 Served
in Ohio Senate
1863–65 Served as judge
of the Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
1859 Prosecuted W.B Connelly under the Fugitive Slave Act for assisting two runaway slaves
1861–65 U.S Civil War
1877–81 Served in U.S.
Senate
1881–89 Served as associate justice of the Supreme Court
◆◆
1861–63 Served in the Ohio Infantry
1884 Authored Hurtado v California opinion
1886 Authored Yick Wo v Hopkins opinion
1889 Died, Washington, D.C.
❖
◆ ◆
Stanley Matthews.
PHOTOGRAPH BY MATHEW BRADY COLLECTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE UNITED STATES
MATTHEWS, STANLEY 501
Trang 5Democratic governor of New York An electoral commission was formed by Congress in early
1877 to resolve disputes over the electoral votes
in several states Matthews represented Hayes and the REPUBLICAN PARTY, successfully arguing that Hayes should be awarded all the disputed votes and thus become president
Matthews was elected to the U.S Senate in
1877 In 1880 Hayes nominated him to the Supreme Court The Senate rejected his nomi-nation, in part because of his 1859 prosecution
of Connelly under the fugitive slave law and also because he had represented railroads and corporations in his law practice Some senators argued that this would affect Matthews’s judgment in cases on these issues
In 1881 PresidentJAMES GARFIELDnominated Matthews to the Court This time he was confirmed by one vote
During his nearly eight years on the Court, Matthews authored 232 opinions and five dissents In HURTADO V CALIFORNIA, 110 U.S
516, 4 S Ct 111, 28 L Ed 232 (1884), Matthews rejected the idea that the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments’ DUE PROCESS provisions required states to prosecute citizens solely through the
that as long as the defendant had notice and an opportunity to prepare a defense to the charges, due process was provided
Matthews is most famous for his opinion in Yick Wo In this opinion Matthews invalidated a San Francisco ordinance requiring owners of laundries housed in wooden buildings to obtain permission from the city government to con-tinue the operation of their business Although the language of the ordinance was neutral,
it was administered in such a way that Chinese laundry owners were denied licenses and nearly all non-Chinese applicants were granted licenses Matthews looked past the neutral language to strike down the ordinance as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, concluding that unequal application of the ordinance furthered “unjust and illegal discrimination.” Matthews’s opinion became the foundation for modern civil rights cases involving DISPARATE IMPACT, in which discrimination is established by statistical in-equality rather than through proof of intentional discrimination
Matthews died March 22, 1889, in Washing-ton, D.C
MAXIM
A broad statement of principle, the truth and reasonableness of which are self-evident A rule of
Maxims were originally quoted in Latin, and many of the Latin phrases continue to be familiar to lawyers in the early 2000s The maxims were not written down in an organized code or enacted by legislatures, but they have been handed down through generations of judges As a result, the wording of a maxim may vary from case to case For example, it is a general rule that equity does not aid a party at fault This maxim has been variously expressed:
nNo one is entitled to the aid of a court of
equity when that aid has become necessary through his or her own fault
nEquity does not relieve a person of the
consequences of his or her own carelessness
nA court of equity will not assist a person in
extricating himself or herself from the circumstances that he or she has created
nEquity will not grant relief from a self-created hardship
The principles of equity and justice are universal in the common-law courts of the world They are flexible principles aimed at achieving justice for both sides in each case No maxim is ever absolute, but all of the principles must be weighed and fitted to the facts of an individual controversy A rule does not apply when it would produce an unfair result A party cannot insist that a strict technicality be enforced in his or her favor when it would create an injustice because equity will instead balance the interests of the different parties and the convenience of the public
The Foundations of Equity
Two maxims form the primary foundations
of equity: Equity will not suffer an injustice and equity acts in personam The first of these explains the whole purpose of equity, and the second highlights the personal nature of equity Equity looks at the circumstances of the individuals in each case and fashions a remedy that is directed at the person of the defendant who must act accordingly to provide the plaintiff with the specified relief Unless a statute expands the powers of an equity court,
it can make decrees that concern property only indirectly, phrasing them as decrees against
THE EXERCISE OF
FUNDAMENTAL
RIGHTS,INCLUDING
THE RIGHT TO PURSUE
A PROFESSION OR
TRADE[MUST]NOT
BE MADE SUBJECT TO
THE EXERCISE OF
ARBITRARY
GOVERNMENTAL
POWER
—S TANLEY
M ATTHEWS
502 MAXIM
Trang 6persons It is said that these are the oldest two
maxims of equity All others are consistent with
them
“He Who Seeks Equity Must
do Equity.”
This maxim is not a moral persuasion but an
enforceable RULE OF LAW It does not require
every plaintiff to have an unblemished
back-ground in order to prevail, but the court will
refuse to assist anyone whoseCAUSE OF ACTIONis
founded on his or her own misconduct toward
the other party If, for example, a wealthy
woman tricks her intended spouse into signing
a prenuptial agreement giving him a token
$500 should they DIVORCE and after marriage
she engages in a consistent pattern of conduct
leading to a divorce, a court could refuse to
enforce the agreement This maxim reflects one
aspect of the principle known as the clean hands
doctrine
“He Who Comes into Equity Must
Come with Clean Hands.”
This maxim bars relief for anyone guilty of
improper conduct in the matter at hand It
operates to prevent any affirmative recovery for
the person with “unclean hands,” no matter
how unfairly the person’s adversary has treated
him or her The maxim is the basis of the clean
hands doctrine Its purpose is to protect the
integrity of the court It does not disapprove
only of illegal acts but will deny relief for bad
conduct that, as a matter of public policy, ought
to be discouraged A court will ask whether the
bad conduct was intentional This rule is not
meant to punish carelessness or a mistake It is
possible that the wrongful conduct is not an act
but a failure to act For example, someone who
hires an agent to represent him or her and then
sits silently while the agent misleads another
party in negotiations is as much responsible for
the false statements as if he himself or she
herself had made them
The bad conduct that is condemned by the
clean hands doctrine must be a part of the
transaction that is the subject of the lawsuit It
is not necessary that it actually have hurt the
other party For example, equity will not relieve
a plaintiff who was also trying to evade taxes
or defraud creditors with a business deal, even
if that person was cheated by the other party in
the transaction
Equity will always decline relief in cases in which both parties have schemed to circumvent the law In one very old case, a robber filed a bill
in equity to force his partner to account for a sum of money When the real nature of the claim was discovered, the bill was dismissed with costs, and the lawyers were held in
This famous case has come to be called The Highwayman (Everet v Williams, Ex 1725, 9 L.Q Rev 197), and judges have been saying ever since that they will not sit to take an account between two robbers
“Equity Aids the Vigilant, not Those Who Slumber on Their Rights.”
This principle recognizes that an adversary can lose evidence, witnesses, and a fair chance to defend himself or herself after the passage of time from the date that the wrong was committed If the defendant can show dis-advantages because for a long time he or she relied on the fact that no lawsuit would be started, then the case should be dismissed in the interests of justice The law encourages a speedy resolution for every dispute It does not favor the cause of someone who suddenly wakes up to enforce his or her rights long after discovering that they exist A long unreasonable delay such
as this is called LACHES, and it is a defense to various forms of equitable relief
“Equity Follows the Law.”
Equity does not replace or violate the law, but it backs it up and supplements it Equity follows appropriate RULES OF LAW, such as the RULES OF
“Equity Acts Specifically.”
This maxim means that a party who sues in equity can recover the precise thing that he or she seeks rather than monetary damages as a substitute for it This maxim is the remedy of
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
“Equity Delights to do Justice and Not
by Halves.”
It is the purpose of equity to find a complete answer to the issues that are raised in a lawsuit
It will bring in all the necessary parties, balance their rights, and give a decree that should protect all of them against further litigation
on the subject Whenever necessary, the court will retain jurisdiction in order to supervise
MAXIM 503
Trang 7enforcement of relief For example, a lawsuit remains alive as long as anINJUNCTIONis in force
Either party may come back into court and apply for reconsideration of the order if circum-stances change Courts also retain jurisdiction
amount can be changed if the child’s needs require an increase or if the supporting parent becomes ill, unemployed, or retired
“Equity will not Suffer a Wrong to be without a Remedy.”
It is the traditional purpose of equity to find solutions in lawsuits Where money will not pay for the injury, equity has the authority to find another remedy
This maxim is a restatement of the broad legal principle: Ubi jus, ibi remedium, “Where there is a right, there is a remedy.” The maxim is applied in equity in an orderly way It does not mean that anything goes It calls forth recognized remedies for well-established wrongs, wrongs that are invasions of property rights or personal
actionable A court will not listen to complaints about every petty annoyance or immoral act
“Equity Regards Substance Rather than Form.”
Equity will not permit justice to be withheld just because of a technicality Formalities that frustrate justice will be disregarded and a better approach found for each case Equity enforces the spirit rather than the letter of the law alone
“Equity is Equality.”
This maxim means that equity will not play favorites For example, a receiver who has been appointed to collect the assets of a business in financial trouble must use the income to pay every creditor an equal share of what is owed
to him or her If a PENSION fund loses a large amount of money through poor investment, then everyone who is entitled to benefits must suffer a fair share of the loss Three adult children of a woman who is killed in an auto accident should share equally in any money that is recovered in
woman’s only surviving close relatives
A judge will depart from this principle only under compelling circumstances, but the rule applies only to parties who are on an equal footing If, for example, the woman in an auto accident died leaving three young children, then
the money that is recovered might be distributed
in proportion to each child’s age A younger child will have lost his or her mother for more years than an older brother or sister Also, a receiver would have to prefer a secured creditor over those creditors who had no enforceable interest in a particular asset of the company Unless there is proof that one person in a group
is in a special position, the law will assume that each should share equally in proportion to his or her contribution or loss
“Between Equal Equities the Law will Prevail.”
When two parties want the same thing and the court cannot in good conscience say that one has a better right to the item than the other, the court will leave it where it is For example, a company that had been collecting sales tax and turning it over to the state government found that it had overtaxed and overpaid by 2 percent
It applied for a refund, but the state refused The court upheld the state on the ground that the money really belonged to the customers
of the company Because the company had no better right to the money than the state, the court left the money with the state
“Between Equal Equities the First in Order of Time Shall Prevail.”
When two parties each have a right to possess something, then the one who acquired an interest first should prevail in equity For example, a man advertises a small boat for sale
in the classified section of the newspaper The first person to see the ad offers him $20 less than the asking price, but the man accepts it That person says he or she will pick up the boat and pay for it on Saturday Meanwhile another person comes by, offers the man more money, and the man takes it Who owns the boat? Contract law and equity agree that the first buyer gets the boat, and the second buyer gets his or her money back
“Equity Abhors a Forfeiture.”
A FORFEITUREis a total loss of a right or a thing because of the failure to do something as required A total loss is usually a rather stiff penalty Unless a penalty is reasonable in relation to the seriousness of the fault, it is too harsh In fairness and good conscience, a court
of equity will refuse to permit an unreasonable forfeiture This maxim has particularly strong
504 MAXIM
Trang 8application to the ownership of land, an interest
for which the law shows great respect Title to
land should never be lost for a trivial reason—
for example, a delay of only a few days in
closing a deal to purchase a house
Generally equity will not interfere with a
forfeiture that is required by statute, such as the
loss of an airplane illegally used to smuggle drugs
into the country Unless the statute violates the
penalty should be enforced “Equity abhors a
forfeiture” does not overcome the maxim that
“equity follows the law.”
Neither will equity disregard a contract
pro-vision that was fairly bargained Generally it is
assumed that a party who does most of what is
required in a business contract and does it in a
reasonable way, should not be penalized for the
violation of a minor technicality A contractor
who completes work on a bridge one day late, for
example, should not be treated as though he or
she had breached the entire contract If the
parties, however, include in their agreement an
express provision, such as time is of the essence,
this means that both parties understand that
performance on time is essential The party who
fails to perform on time would forfeit all rights under the contract
FURTHER READINGS Broom, Heerbert, ed 2008 A Selection of Legal Maxims:
Classified and Illustrated (1854) Whitefish, MT:
Kessinger.
Hoffer, Peter Charles 1990 The Law’s Conscience: Equitable Constitutionalism in America Chapel Hill: Univ of North Carolina Press.
Kraut, Jayson, et al, eds 1983 American Jurisprudence.
Rochester, NY: Lawyers Cooperative.
CROSS REFERENCES Equity; Forfeiture; Laches.
MAYHEM Mayhem atCOMMON LAWrequired a type of injury that permanently rendered the victim less able
to fight offensively or defensively; it might be accomplished either by the removal of (dismem-berment), or by the disablement of, some bodily member useful in fighting Today, by statute, permanent disfigurement has been added; and
as to dismemberment and disablement, there is
no longer a requirement that the member have military significance In many states the crime of mayhem is treated as aggravated assault
MAYHEM 505