Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A conjunction introducing a clause that contrasts with or qualifies the statement immediately preceding it.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Wesley Wong obtained title to a vehicle by falsely claiming it was a gift from his employer. The prosecution charged him with false pretenses. If Wong had obtained only temporary custody through the same misrepresentation, the offense would instead have been larceny by trick, whereas the victim's intent to convey full title controlled the charge. The court focused on the victim's intent to determine which crime applied.
Wanda Williams sought an abortion under state restrictions that limited access after the first trimester. The state asserted interests in maternal health and potential life. Those interests were weighed against the woman's liberty interest, whereas the court balanced the competing claims to set the constitutional framework. The court balanced the competing claims to set the constitutional framework.
Warren Wu was taken into custody and questioned without receiving warnings about his rights. He made incriminating statements during the interrogation. Those statements would be inadmissible if obtained in violation of the required advisements, whereas the court examined whether the interrogation was custodial to decide admissibility. The court examined whether the interrogation was custodial to decide admissibility.
Wayne Walker purchased land intending to develop it for industrial use. The village enacted an ordinance restricting the parcel to residential development. The restriction advanced public welfare through orderly growth, whereas the court assessed whether the zoning measure exceeded the municipality's authority under the police power. The court assessed whether the zoning measure exceeded the municipality's authority under the police power.
Winston West filed a diversity action in federal court and served process under the federal rules. The defendant argued that state service requirements should control. The federal rule addressed the manner of service directly, whereas the court determined that the federal rule governed because it was a valid procedural provision. The court determined that the federal rule governed because it was a valid procedural provision.
Wesley Wells, a public school student, refused to salute the flag during a mandatory exercise. The state board required participation to promote national unity. That requirement conflicted with the student's right to refrain from compelled expression, whereas the court held that the mandate violated the First Amendment. The court held that the mandate violated the First Amendment.
Whereas introduces the key distinction that false pretenses requires obtaining title while larceny by trick requires obtaining only custody or possession. Courts look to the victim's intent to decide which interest was conveyed. The contrast determines the proper charge and the elements that must be proved.
…unclear by recent decisions in state and federal courts striking down existing state laws, in whole or in part. [^maj-38]: "Whereas, Abortion, like any other medical procedure, should not be performed when contrary to the best interests of the patient since good medical practice requires due consideration for the…