Let’s begin by examining the uniqueness claim.
Original product packaging is required for filing a damage claim.
About 57% of retirees would build more wealth through their life if they waited to claim until they were 70 (when only 4% of current retirees claim), United Income found, while only 6.5% of retirees would have more wealth if they claimed before age 64 (when over 70% of retirees currently claim).
Consider the first claim, the positive claim.
They claim that such “in between” cases constitute manipulation.
This claim understands Posner’s claim as a theory of adjudication.
Note also that claim (II) differs from Claim (V) for similar reasons.
Opinions differ as to whether this is a scientific claim or an aesthetic claim (see below).
Claim (I), the explanatory claim, asserts that common law legal rules induce efficient behavior.
A typical desert claim is a claim to the effect that someone deserves something from someone on some basis.
One should not, for example, claim that all astronomical beliefs are unjustified unless one has some reason for this claim.
Claim (IV), the behavioral claim, asserts that economic rationality explains how individuals respond to legal rules and institutions.
Policy analysis is thus linked both to the behavioral claim (Claim IV) and the design claim (Claim VIII).
For instance, if a person A has a claim, then A lacks a “no-claim” (a no-claim is the opposite of a claim).
Some claim-rights exist independently of voluntary actions like signing a contract; and some claim-rights correspond to duties in more than one agent.
Let’s set aside the uniqueness claim for the moment and just focus on the existence claim; is it really the case that John wants there to be a ghost in the attic at all?
If the claim was expressed in the language LM used by mathematicians, then nominalists could accept the claim while still denying that there are mathematical objects, contrary to the purpose of the claim.
Harking back to (Claim 2) and (Claim 3) above, extant process-geared treatments of familiar topics surely provide considerable support for the claim that process philosophy is viable (Claim 2).
You have several powers with respect to your claim—you may waive the claim (granting others permission to touch the computer), annul the claim (abandoning the computer as your property), or transfer the claim (making the computer into someone else’s property).
But the shift to the more modest claim requires that one move from the very modest claim that evil exists to the stronger claim that there are certain evils that an omniscient and omnipotent person could have prevented the existence of such evils without thereby either allowing equal or greater evils, or preventing equal or greater goods, and the question arises as to how that claim can be supported.
- assert or affirm strongly; state to be true or existing
Example: He claimed that he killed the burglar
- an assertion of a right (as to money or property)
Example: his claim asked for damages
- demand as being one's due or property; assert one's right or title to
Example: He claimed his suitcases at the airline counter
- an assertion that something is true or factual
Example: his claim that he was innocent
- ask for legally or make a legal claim to, as of debts, for example
Example: They claimed on the maximum allowable amount
- demand for something as rightful or due
Example: they struck in support of their claim for a shorter work day
- an informal right to something
Example: his claim on her attentions
- lay claim to; as of an idea
- take as an undesirable consequence of some event or state of affairs
Example: the accident claimed three lives
- an established or recognized right
Example: a strong legal claim to the property
- a demand
On this page, there are 20 sentence examples for claim. They are all from high-quality sources and constantly processed by lengusa's machine learning routines.
Just use the " " button to fragment sentence examples and start your learning flow.
Example output from one of your searches:
But the shift to the more modest claim requires that one move from the very modest claim that evil exists to the stronger claim that there are certain evils that an omniscient and omnipotent person could have prevented the existence of such evils without thereby either allowing equal or greater evils or preventing equal or greater goods and the question arises as to how that claim can be supported