rule in

(redirected from ruled in)

rule in

To decide definitively that something will or can possibly happen. (Used especially—and somewhat redundantly—in the phrase "not ruled in or ruled out.") Look, nothing has been ruled in or ruled out at this stage, so we just have to wait until the doctors have more information to work with. We'll neither rule in nor rule out the possibility of a shakeup in management if this branch's profits continue to fall.
See also: rule
References in periodicals archive ?
In a Texas case, the Fifth Circuit ruled in HE Butt Grocery Co.
Relying on McQuaig and RLI, the Florida Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that allegations that a restaurateur was negligent in failing to prevent an incident in which an aggrieved patron successively shot several patrons have been held to allege multiple occurrences.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in a Louisiana case that where the insured sold contaminated bird seed to eight dealers, who in turn sold the seed to various individual bird owners, it was the insured's sales to the dealers that were the cause of insured's liability, not the number of individual claims by irate bird owners.
In a later Michigan case, the Sixth Circuit ruled in Michigan Chemical Corp.
In a related vein, a New York trial court ruled in ExxonMobil Corp.
In a coverage dispute arising out of the Agent Orange class action (over which he had also presided), Judge Jack Weinstein ruled in Uniroyal, Inc.
In an unpublished opinion, the court ruled in Sunoco, Inc.
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in Metropolitan Life Ins.
In the most recent opinion to analyze these issues, the California Court of Appeals ruled in London Market Insurers v.
In one of the few cases that has adopted an intermediate position in the asbestos context, a federal district court ruled in Fina, Inc.
Judge John Coughenour ruled in favor of Torres, and the INS agreed to allow Torres to have an attorney present during his hearing.
District Judge Jennifer Coffman ruled in May of 2000 that the three counties may not sponsor Ten Commandments displays.
In the only case that has addressed this question to date, the California Court of Appeal ruled in early 1998 that the assertion of a Buss claim does not invariably give rise to a Cumis conflict.
California courts interpreted "genuine-issue" to mean uncertainty as to applicable law (17) until the state court of appeal ruled in Fraley v.