Sentences with phrase «access to the courts when»

Few would seek to deny American public school students access to the courts when inadequate school funding threatens their chances for achieving academic, and ultimately economic, success.

The EJC is a collaboration created by the Massachusetts Bar Association, Boston Bar Association, and the Massachusetts Legal Assistance Corporation committed to ensuring that low - income people in Massachusetts have access to the courts when they have a civil (non-criminal) legal problem.

The court recognised the state's interest in controlling access to a court when it came to certain categories of staff.

Not exact matches

Even though Duterte said he would not deviate from the July court ruling and that he would not bring up the issue during his visit, a Philippine official did tell Reuters that he intended to raise the issue of Filipino fishermen, who had been denied access to waters around Scarborough since 2012, when China seized the shoal.

«Connecticut and Indiana have demonstrated the effectiveness of allowing police to work through the courts to temporarily reduce access to guns when there is strong evidence that someone is at risk of violence, while California and Washington State have taken the critical step of extending their laws to enable family members of someone who may be in crisis to initiate this process.

The «second tier» mandates the award of attorney fees when a party denied access to records «has substantially prevailed» and the court finds that «the agency had no reasonable basis for denying access.»

U.S. District Court Judge Gary Sharpe is expected to rule on the issue of when New York should hold its party primaries, part of an ongoing Department of Justice lawsuit to force the state into complying with the MOVE Act, which governs timely access to military and overseas ballots.

But he and members of other good government groups are putting a priority on strengthening FOIL in other ways, including passing a law that would mandate the payment of attorneys» fees to a plaintiff when a court finds that an agency had no «reasonable basis» to deny access to a public record.

The U.S. Supreme Court was about to rule on whether colleges could use race - conscious admissions policies when the directors of the undergraduate Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC) program gathered last month in California for their annual meeting.

The judge argued that the state law, «when measured against Supreme Court precedent... falls woefully short of constitutional requirements» in the restrictions it placed on access to abortion for pregnant girls under age 18.

In Kansas City in the late 1980s and early»90s, African American parents were justifiably irate when the federal court's integration plan denied their children access to the magnet schools of their choice because so many seats had been set aside for white children — who did not show up in sufficient numbers to fill them.

Even in 1647, more than a century prior to the Declaration of Independence, when the General Court of Massachusetts decreed that every town of 50 families should have an elementary school and every town of 100 families should have a Latin school to ensure that Puritan children could read the Bible; non-Puritans were denied access to school.

The defendants lost the case last June when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu struck down California's laws regarding teacher tenure, layoffs and dismissals by saying they deny students access to a quality public education.

Their first big bust occurred last month when a UK high court ruled that five of the largest internet providers had to block access to several pirate websites.

When staying at Ocean Grove you have access to the stunning pool and tennis court only a short walk from the beach.

Despite two federal courts ruling in favor of the Dakota Access pipeline, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decided it needed to explore alternate routes for the pipeline at the end of last year when the pipeline was already over 90 percent complete.

Notably, when the reporters were asked the one thing they would most want to change about the litigation process, over 70 percent said they would make it easier for the news media to access court documents.

-- have access to a competent, reliable and readily available 2nd and 3rd lines of support when they need to resolve technical issues beyond what they ordinarily deal with — be provided with a friendly Graphical User Interface to administer the web site — be provided with a modular framework, allowing them to add or remove features from the web site in a relatively painless way — have access to usability and technical information on the chosen platform to host the court web site — be provided with timely security patches to the web site platform

Still, I would really like someone to explain why, when other jurisdictions in Canada manage to have 21st century court record access, we are stuck in the 19th.

[16] Thus, the issue is framed — can a defendant or third party who has not obtained a doctor's report by compulsion of a court order, and prior to disclosure of any medical - legal reports by the plaintiff or in the absence of any reports, obtain access to the non-treating doctor's notes and clinical findings, or are said notes and clinical records privileged as forming part of the brief of the plaintiff's solicitor until the time when the plaintiff chooses to rely on the non-treating doctor as a witness at trial and the doctor's notes must be disclosed...

[45]... when hearing fees deprive litigants of access to the superior courts, they infringe the basic right of citizens to bring their cases to court.

On appeal, we argued, and the Superior Court agreed, that the alleged evidence of the utility company's control by contract and conduct (e.g., the presence of a contract field representative on site, internal safety guidelines, controlling access to the pole when lines were energized, the provision of certain ladders for access to the pole) was insufficient as a matter of law to constitute control over the means and methods of the subcontractor's work, and thus, the utility was not liable as a landowner out of possession.

As part of the sentences for David and Collet Stephan — whose infant son died of meningitis due to their failure to access medical care for him when he fell ill — the Alberta court required that notice of the sentence be posted on Prayers for Ezekiel and any other social media sites maintained by and dealing with the subject of their family.

One company's founder even bills herself as the «Fairy Godmother of Divorce» These types of financing arrangements could provide some fairness in hotly contested divorce cases when one side maintains control of bank accounts and assets during the litigation and therefore has the ability to hire lawyers, while the other side may get locked out of accessing financial assets before the divorce papers are even filed with the court.

As for court websites, they are all over the board when it comes to docket access.

There is more to a paperless office than just scanning everything and accessing your documents when you're at home, on vacation, or in court.

Not only would it save money, it would mean fast access to digital recordings via CM / ECF for lawyers involved in the case (and the public, through PACER, although I suppose courts would have to be extra-vigilant when it comes to confidential information).

Although lawyer mediators usually commit to telling the parties when they are considering a settlement that falls outside the ambit of what a court might decide, this is no substitute for each party having access to legal advice before starting mediation and as needed during it.

Please take the time to learn about cy pres and the wonderful impact you can make on your community when you choose to direct court awards to support access to justice through civil legal aid.

When Hoodfar was taken to a prison in Tehran, her local lawyer was not told what the charges against his client were, he had almost no access to her and the presiding judge eventually dismissed him without Hoodfar's consent and replaced him with a lawyer who was deemed acceptable to plead before the Revolutionary Court.

Protecting the network by a password, which would require users to reveal their identity when accessing the network (by which technical means the Court did however not say — and as will be explained below, this might prove to be a weak point in the Court's ruling), could deter and dissuade users from committing infringing acts through this network.

The High Court judge, Mr Justice Francis, said that Parliament can not have intended for legal aid not to be available in such cases: «However, it does seem to me that when Parliament changed the law in relation to legal aid and significantly restricted the availability of legal aid, yet continued to make legal aid available in care cases where the state is seeking orders against parents, it can not have intended that parents in the position that these parents have been in should have no access to legal advice or representation... I am aware that there are many parents around the country in similar positions where their cases have been less public and where they have had to struggle to represent themselves.

Faced with a choice between a SRL who had access to a lawyer - coach for hearing preparation (covering topics such as how to address the court, when to expect to speak and for how long, how to present evidence, how to intervene appropriately, how to stay calm and centred, etc) and one who has not — which do you imagine a judge would prefer?

Although the Supreme Court of Canada held in Christie that a «general access to legal services in relation to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the populaCourt of Canada held in Christie that a «general access to legal services in relation to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the populacourt and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the population.

The federal judiciary violated federal law when it used Pacer fees for courtroom technology and other projects that don't provide the public with access to information stored in the courts»...

The national Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters notes in its final report that only about 6.5 % of legal problems ever make it to court, but it is unlikely in the extreme that so many of the people with high school diplomas or less are bundled into the 93.5 % who manage to resolve their legal issues outside of court, especially when we know that for people with low incomes, legal issues tend not come one at a time but cluster and multiply into other areas of the law.

The federal judiciary violated federal law when it used Pacer fees for courtroom technology and other projects that don't provide the public with access to information stored in the courts» electronic docketing system, a federal judge has ruled.

In the recent decision of Fantl v Transamerica Life Canada («Fantl»)[1], the Ontario Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal of the Divisional Court's decision and confirmed the certification of class claims in negligent misrepresentation, noting that it was time for class actions to «deliver on their promise of access to justice» [2] when it comes to individual issues.

When law enforcement agencies and courts have copies of the same record, you're almost always going to have better luck getting access from the courts, which are set to open by default.

Fittingly, on November 9, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a landmark decision in Moore v. British Columbia (Education) affirming that students with learning disabilities have a right to an education, and to be accommodated when accessing that right when there is a need.

According to a press release from the Supreme Court of Florida, «Thousands of Floridians struggling to make ends meet, including many Floridians with moderate incomes, still face barriers when they seek meaningful access to civil justice.

There are parents who do more harm than good to their children, and the court is right to limit their access and place restrictions on when, where and how often they can meet.

However, when the parties have substantial liquid marital assets, the family court has [in my limited experience] almost always allowed the primary wage earner access to at least 10 % of the liquid marital assets to fund the litigation.

I thought it might be helpful to add some broader analysis of when it's proper for a judge to gag people or to restrict access to court records.

That's when the SCC is expected to tackle a challenge over court hearing fees, which the Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia and the Canadian Bar Association B.C. branch say are unconstitutional because they impede access to justice for the middle class.

In a digital world, sharing information online comes as second nature to many people, but if you're a party to a court case and post disclosure materials on the Internet, don't be surprised when a judge decides to restrict your access to those files.

The unprecedented drop of approximately 70 % in claims when fees were introduced clearly supports the Supreme Court's decision that these fees reduced access to justice.

One of the points I tried to make to the 9th Circuit of U.S. Court of Appeals when I asked them to give me all of one district was that, by having access to all the data, I would be able to go in and, much more quickly, find all those privacy violations and assist the courts in fixing the problems and in raising awareness so that, when a lawyer submits a document that's got 40 pages of home addresses of school children with their Social Security number.

For most law students and recent graduates this third thing has fallen off the map at a time when everyone from the Chief Justices of the Supreme Court to the Bar Associations, law schools and LSUC are talking about increasing access to justice.

Whether or not one treats the majority opinion's public forum analysis of social networks as «dicta» (which is legalese for «stuff in an opinion I don't like so I don't consider binding»), all 8 Supreme Court justices agreed that subscribers have a First Amendment right to access information and speak online, and that the government can not prohibit a person from accessing content that has nothing to do with preventing repeat offenses — even when the repeat offense is child molestation, and the evidence arguably supported that child molesters were particularly prone to repetition.