defendant - Sigma Knowledge base Browser

appearance as argument number 1

(documentation defendant EnglishLanguage "(defendant ?AGENT ?ACTION) means the LegalAction ?ACTION makes a legal claim against ?AGENT.")	Mid-level-ontology.kif 17894-17895
(domain defendant 1 LegalAction)	Mid-level-ontology.kif 17896-17896	The number 1 argument of defendant is an instance of legal action
(domain defendant 2 CognitiveAgent)	Mid-level-ontology.kif 17897-17897	The number 2 argument of defendant is an instance of cognitive agent
(subrelation defendant patient)	Mid-level-ontology.kif 17898-17898	defendant is a subrelation of patient
(instance defendant CaseRole)	Mid-level-ontology.kif 17899-17899	defendant is an instance of case role

appearance as argument number 2

(format EnglishLanguage defendant "%2 is the defendant in %1")	domainEnglishFormat.kif 3212-3212
(format ChineseTraditionalLanguage defendant "%2 是在 %1 的 defendant ")	domainEnglishFormat.kif 3213-3213
(format ChineseLanguage defendant "%2 是在 %1 的 defendant ")	domainEnglishFormat.kif 3214-3214
(termFormat EnglishLanguage defendant "defendant")	domainEnglishFormat.kif 18894-18894
(termFormat ChineseTraditionalLanguage defendant "被告")	domainEnglishFormat.kif 18895-18895
(termFormat ChineseLanguage defendant "被告")	domainEnglishFormat.kif 18896-18896

antecedent

(=> (and (defenseLawyer ?P ?A) (defendant ?P ?D)) (desires ?A (not (exists (?L) (and (instance ?L LegalDecision) (refers ?L ?P) (not (wants ?D ?L)))))))	Law.kif 275-286	If X is the defense lawyer in Y and Z is the defendant in Y, then X desires there doesn't exist W such that W is an instance of legal decision, W includes a reference to Y, and Z doesn't want W
(=> (and (prosecutor ?P ?A) (defendant ?P ?D)) (desires ?A (exists (?L) (and (instance ?L LegalDecision) (refers ?L ?P) (not (wants ?D ?L))))))	Law.kif 299-309	If X is the prosecutor in Y and Z is the defendant in Y, then X desires there exists W such that W is an instance of legal decision, W includes a reference to Y, and Z doesn't want W

consequent

(=>
    (and
        (instance ?AGREEMENT Contract)
        (partyToAgreement ?AGENT1 ?AGREEMENT)
        (partyToAgreement ?AGENT2 ?AGREEMENT)
        (instance ?PROC IntentionalProcess)
        (agent ?PROC ?AGENT1)
        (realization ?PROC ?PROP)
        (containsFormula ?PROP ?FORM1)
        (containsFormula ?AGREEMENT ?FORM2)
        (not
            (consistent ?FORM1 ?FORM2)))
    (modalAttribute
        (exists (?LEGAL)
            (and
                (instance ?LEGAL LegalAction)
                (plaintiff ?LEGAL ?AGENT2)
                (defendant ?LEGAL ?AGENT1))) Possibility))

If All of the following hold: (1) X is an instance of contract (2) X is a party to agreement of Y (3) X is a party to agreement of Z (4) W is an instance of intentional process (5) Y is an agent of W (6) W expresses the content of V (7) V contains the formula U (8) X contains the formula T (9) T is not a consistent of U, then the statement there exists S such that S is an instance of legal action, Z is the plaintiff in S, and Y is the defendant in S has the modal force of possibility