Sentences with phrase «between judges in cases»

The Supreme Court has recognized an absolute privilege that protects the confidentiality of communications between judges in cases: see Mackeigan v. Hickman (1989) and Ontario (Public Safety... [more]

The Supreme Court has recognized an absolute privilege that protects the confidentiality of communications between judges in cases: see Mackeigan v. Hickman (1989) and Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v Criminal Lawyers» Association (2010).

Not exact matches

That's the kind of reasoning that used to get you into trouble in legal method courses during the first year of law school for failing to distinguish between the actual holding of a case and the obiter dicta of the judges.

In a previous case, judges threw out the death sentence for a defendant because three hours lapsed between the offense and the first report made.

We're building a wall between here and Mexico,» said Trump, who claimed that the Indiana - born US District Judge Gonzalo Curiel faced an «absolute conflict,» in ruling on the billionaire's case.

I still say we must be judge in May, the title look like its between Arsenal and chelsea and if that's the case then our form against the top teams must improve..

Acting Erie County Judge James A. W. McLeod declared a mistrial in a drug and human trafficking case after a prosecution witness made a statement to the District Attorney's Office last week about an alleged prior contact between McLeod and the defendant.

Nii Samuel Mohenu said since it emerged that Justice Ajet - Nassam was caught on camera as one of the corrupt judges who took bribes and subverted justice, they now believe he was compromised in the case between Abokobi and Berekusu.

The Court of Appeals eventually ruled in Soares» favor but even then - Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman noted the case involved a «personal issue back and forth» between Carter and Soares.

Another judge, Joan Madden, consolidated unrelated asbestos cases, which resulted in huge increases in jury verdicts — from an average of $ 7 million to $ 24 million per plaintiff between 2010 and 2014, data collected by Bates White Economic Consulting show.

The judge is also being accused of receiving N750, 000 from Mr Joseph Nwobike (SAN), between March 2015 and September, 2015, to get «favourable» judgment in some cases.

Acting Erie County Judge James A. W. McLeod declared a mistrial Monday in a drug and human trafficking case after a prosecution witness made a statement to the District Attorney's Office last week about an alleged prior contact between McLeod and the defendant.

CASE - referred experts are not expected to serve pro bono; each expert's fee is determined between the expert and the judge, although AAAS will assist in the process.

The relationship between an athlete personal best in competition and back squat, bench press and power clean 1RM was determined via general linear model polynomial contrast analysis and regression for a group of 53 collegiate elite level throwers (24 males and 29 females); data analysis showed significant linear and quadratic trends for distance and 1RM power clean for both male (linear: p ≤ 0.001, quadratic: p ≤ 0.003) and female (linear: p ≤ 0.001, quadratic: p = 0.001) suggesting how the use of Olympic - style weightlifting movements — the clean, in this particular case, but more in general explosive, fast, athletic - like movements — can be a much better alternative for sport - specific testing for shot putters (Judge, et al, 2013).

Tell a story about oppression and justice wrapped in a deliciously violent wrapping underneath the story of the relationship between two people, in this case veteran Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) and the rookie Judge (and mutant) Anderson (played wonderfully by Olivia Thirlby).

Two years ago, PELP, a collaborative project between faculty at Harvard Business School and Harvard Graduate School of Education that focuses on developing effective leadership and management practices to support large - scale organizational change in urban school districts, began the Case Competition where teams of Harvard University students present recommendations for a school district to a panel of faculty judges.

A federal judge overseeing a 26 - year - old school desegregation case in Chicago has indicated that as long as some details are added, he is inclined to approve a proposed final settlement between the school system and the U.S. Department of Justice that could end court supervision of the district by July of next year.

Due to this general disconnect between achievement and attainment effects of choice programs and, in a few cases in our sample, individual choice schools, we caution commentators and regulators to be more humble and circumspect in judging school choice programs and schools of choice based solely on their test score effects.

In the New Jersey case, the judge said that she does not «see any link other than speculation and conjecture between the LIFO statute and the denial of a thorough and efficient education to these twelve children.»

This praise did not come with any measure of bias, as Chin was the same judge who rejected the 2011 settlement terms between Google and a number of publishers, stating that the settlement would be «rewarding [Google] for engaging in wholesale copying of copyrighted works without permission, while releasing claims well beyond those presented in the case.»

In a decision that could start an e-book price war in the publishing industry, a federal judge on Thursday approved a settlement between the Justice Department and three major publishers in a civil antitrust case that accused the companies of collusion in the pricing of digital bookIn a decision that could start an e-book price war in the publishing industry, a federal judge on Thursday approved a settlement between the Justice Department and three major publishers in a civil antitrust case that accused the companies of collusion in the pricing of digital bookin the publishing industry, a federal judge on Thursday approved a settlement between the Justice Department and three major publishers in a civil antitrust case that accused the companies of collusion in the pricing of digital bookin a civil antitrust case that accused the companies of collusion in the pricing of digital bookin the pricing of digital books.

Rhonda Wright of 1109 East Pierce Ave. has been ordered to appear for arraignment at 9:30 a.m. Dec. 13 before Osceola Judge Ronald Legendre.No arrest order has been given in the summons case, officials said.The charges allege Wright abandoned the horses, causing them to suffer injury or malnutrition between Sept..

a. Develop training on animal cruelty and the link between cruelty and domestic violence for law enforcement personnel; b. Expand the current ACO training curriculum; c. Train and educate judges, appropriate court personnel, and prosecutors about animal cruelty; d. Educate veterinarians about recognizing animal cruelty and understanding current law; e. Create a state multidisciplinary team for animal hoarding that would develop an emergency response system and oversee a task force to focus on early intervention of hoarding including mental health counseling in all animal hoarding cases; and create a Department of Mental Health and Department of Corrections forensic assessment protocol for early intervention, sentencing, treatment, and rehabilitation; and f. Develop and promote animal cruelty prevention, identification, training and screening tools among pet service providers, associations, and the commercial pet industry.

With this piece I wish to show the constant dialogue which occurs between self and society, in this case especially dealing with the continuing problem of being judged and categorized due to skin - colour.

In March 2018, Happer — among other, was asked by a judge to disclose any ties he had to fossil fuel companies in a case between cities and fossil fuel companieIn March 2018, Happer — among other, was asked by a judge to disclose any ties he had to fossil fuel companies in a case between cities and fossil fuel companiein a case between cities and fossil fuel companies.

... The judges admired this winning design because it addressed both these conditions; by emphasising a cut between buildings with the introduction of vegetation beams (in this case covered in moss), the architect has neatly reversed the stereotype of that conventional Tokyo condition.

So, summing up, by going back to a para. 24, did the motion judge mean: «On the facts of this case, it would certainly be open to a trier of fact to infer that there was a necesssary, even if minor, connection between I / Land's negligent conduct in selecting and fitting a defective hose and the damage that occurred.»

The Des Moines Register (via the Sentencing Law and Policy blog and ABA Journal) has the story of the clash between U.S. District Judge Stephanie Rose and prosecutors in the Southern District of Iowa U.S. Attorney's Office over sentencing in several criminal cases.

As in the Kuznetsov case, the decision in the Arcadis case provides a helpful summary of the applicable principles determining whether or not there is a binding contract between parties, with the judge referring to the elegant summary of Lord Clarke in RTS Limited v Molkerei Alois Müller GmbH [2010] 1 WLR 753:

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against sentence was allowed — Trial judge erred in concluding that discharge was not appropriate in circumstances, especially given conclusion that accused did not deliberately attempt to injure victim — Trial judge found that there was no need for either specific deterrence or general deterrence; prime concern was need for denunciation of her conduct — Section 730 of Criminal Code permits discharge in cases of this nature, provided that it was in best interest of accused and not contrary to public interest — Accused was responsible individual with no record whatsoever, she held position as counsellor and social worker for 25 years — Trial judge did not find that conviction would definitely affect her employment, but possibility existed, and such conviction would necessarily result in criminal record — There was no likelihood of re-offending — Conditional discharge would not be contrary to public interest.

Once Friday comes, the judges are together for their last day (and likely are getting into a rythm, having worked together for 4 days straight)- for cases that are on the borderline between whether they reserve or not, it may make more sense to take the time to deliver a decision on the spot, rather than try to schedule another time in the future to talk about the case.

In cases where disputes have arisen between Canada and First Nations in these areas, the lack of a legislative framework has led some judges to question whether judicial review is even availablIn cases where disputes have arisen between Canada and First Nations in these areas, the lack of a legislative framework has led some judges to question whether judicial review is even availablin these areas, the lack of a legislative framework has led some judges to question whether judicial review is even available.

A fascination of this case is to watch a judge treading a careful path between the technicalities of issue estoppel and a possible strike out on the one hand, balanced against a clear emphasis on the court's duty to protect the welfare of a child in the widest possible sense: the first a matter of analysis of law, the second a matter of pure discretion.

This argument was not made by any of the parties in this case and the Advocate - General used the international law argument to conclude that EU - law was not applicable at all, whereas the CJEU — in my view — stays quite cryptic about how to fit in the interplay between EU - law and international law in its framework / criteria of judging free movement cases.

As stated by the dissenting judge, «the nature of the nexus between the counts in this case did not provide a reason why it was necessary, desirable or convenient to try the cases together» (para. 130).

In the case of Lambert v. Travelers Indemnity Company of America, three judges resolved disagreements between the workers» compensation law and the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act, both of which concern the way in which medical liens should be satisfieIn the case of Lambert v. Travelers Indemnity Company of America, three judges resolved disagreements between the workers» compensation law and the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act, both of which concern the way in which medical liens should be satisfiein which medical liens should be satisfied.

[39] I acknowledge that Ms. Prakash's action is set for hearing in February and an order that the matters be heard together will necessitate an adjournment of that trial; however, I am satisfied of a high degree of interconnectedness between the parties and that it is in the interests of justice that the matters be heard together, or as directed following the case planning process or by judicial management, if a judge is appointed to hear the matter.

The Gallagher case has been analysed in the wake of calls for family courts to be more transparent and at a time when senior judges are in disagreement over how much the public should be told about money fights between separated couples.

If one reads the comments on the Charleston Post and Courier's web site regarding the Judicial Merit Selection Commission's preliminary decision that Judge F.P. Segars - Andrews is unqualified to remain a family court judge because of her handling of a divorce case in which there was a business relationship between her husband's law partner and one -LSBJudge F.P. Segars - Andrews is unqualified to remain a family court judge because of her handling of a divorce case in which there was a business relationship between her husband's law partner and one -LSBjudge because of her handling of a divorce case in which there was a business relationship between her husband's law partner and one -LSB-...]

In civil cases, I found that (a) there is a small, but apparently statistically significant, difference between how likely each judge is to rule in favour of an appellant, and (b) there is a very noticeable difference in how long each judge takes to render a decisioIn civil cases, I found that (a) there is a small, but apparently statistically significant, difference between how likely each judge is to rule in favour of an appellant, and (b) there is a very noticeable difference in how long each judge takes to render a decisioin favour of an appellant, and (b) there is a very noticeable difference in how long each judge takes to render a decisioin how long each judge takes to render a decision.

Although it is rare a judge would reject an agreement between the parties, the Arizona Court of Appeals in the Boncoskey v. Boncoskey case indicated a trial judge must hold a hearing if the court has determined the agreement is not fair and equitable or in the best interests of the children before making any changes to the agreement.

In the latest development in the class action, U.S. District Judge Paul Crotty issued a sharply worded order rejecting Makhnevich's argument that the case should be dismissed because there was no «actual controversy» between the partieIn the latest development in the class action, U.S. District Judge Paul Crotty issued a sharply worded order rejecting Makhnevich's argument that the case should be dismissed because there was no «actual controversy» between the partiein the class action, U.S. District Judge Paul Crotty issued a sharply worded order rejecting Makhnevich's argument that the case should be dismissed because there was no «actual controversy» between the parties.

The judge admitted that the relationship between the priest and the defendants was not like a regular employment contract, but in this case, he opted to look at certain special factors, including the nature and closeness of the relationship between the priest and the defendant, and the connection between the tortious act and the purpose of the relationship / employment / appointment, which was based on the factors outlined below.

[10] And, quite apart from avoiding the multiplicity of actions — the mischief sought to be avoided by s 8 of the Judicature Act and R 1.3 of the Alberta Rules of Court, a proposition for which there is also ample case authority — the chambers judge properly adhered to the urging of the Supreme Court of Canada in Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7 (CanLII), [2014] 1 SCR 87 to the effect that courts are obliged to resolve legal disputes in the most cost - effective and timely method available, provided the process selected ensures fairness between the parties.

But just in case the recent outpouring of information has only whetted your appetite, check out Judge Posner's articulation on the differences between 23 (b)(2) and 23 (b)(3) classes in Re: Allstate Insurance Company (7th Cir.

Earlier last month, the Connecticut Court of Appeals issued a written opinion in a Connecticut car accident case requiring the court to discuss the distinction between a judge's decision whether to admit certain evidence and the weight that evidence is afforded by the fact - finder once admitted.

The case was referred to the ECJ by a Danish judge in a dispute between Post Danmark and Konkurrencerådet, the Danish competition authority.

To use analogy in law, the Judge suggests that you (1) establish similarities between two cases; (2) announce the rule of law embedded in the first case; and (3) apply the rule of law to the second case.

The question is, in this new costs budgeting Jackson era, will the prospect of «hot - tubbing» — otherwise known as concurrent evidence (ie, the method of giving evidence where the experts sit in the box together and the judge chairs a discussion between them)-- ensure that cases like this get resolved sooner rather than later — no doubt time will tell.

Because of her concern about the imbalance of resources between the music - industry plaintiffs and Tenenbaum, the judge wrote, she did everything in her power to permit him to make his best case for fair use.