Sentences with phrase «came to my trial court»

They will exhibit at the National Association for Presiding Judges and Court Officers / National Center for State Courts leadership conference in Scottsdale, Arizona September 24 - 27 where Court Innovation's Cartwright will co-present «Online Dispute Resolution: Coming to a Trial Court Near You».

Not exact matches

The accord came ahead of a jury trial that was set to begin on Monday in state court in Woburn, Massachusetts.

After years of trial, court ruling came to a settlement decision with Facebook handing out $ 65 million to the Winklevoss twins.

Attorneys for Waymo have said in court that over the nearly year - long case they have amassed a file of evidence against Uber and were ready to go to trial before the revelation of the Jacobs letter, which came days before the original trial date.

When it came time for the trial, all the judges of the Amherst County Circuit Court had to disqualify themselves because the commonwealth attorney, J. Barney Wyckoff, was not only a member of the church but one of the defendants.

«In the future, depending on the number of cases that will come up for trial, the Judiciary may increase the courts and number of Judges to ensure that the courts are not overwhelmed by the volume of work and that the cases are dealt with expeditiously,» the statement added.

Bharara was fired by President Donald Trump last year, but his wish is about to come true: The high - profile trial of Percoco and three co-defendants on charges that Percoco was bribed to exercise influence on behalf of a power company and Syracuse developers starts Monday in a federal court in Manhattan.

According to eyewitnesses, when they came into court and saw Haggerty sitting next to Tom Ognibene, they thought he was on trial.

Coverage of the phone - hacking allegations has been subdued in the British press due to concerns about prejudicing the trial, but with the case coming before court in front of the international media it is now expected to dominate the front pages once again.

He said, «I also want to put it on record that we have been coming to court ready for trial; it is the prosecution that has not been allowing the trial to proceed.

Come 26th April, the new Attorney General, after 6 weeks of studying the over one year court proceedings on the trial, shall appear in court for trial to continue.

«That the applicant, who knows full well that she is on bail in the United Kingdom where she is being investigated for several financial crimes, and that she would not be able to leave that country in view of the ongoing investigation and imminent trial, is seeking the order of this honourable court for the charge before this honourable court to be amended to include her name on the face of the charge in order for her to escape from investigation and prosecution in the United Kingdom under the guise that she is coming to face her trial before this honourable court and also to scuttle the trial before this honourable court.»

Pigott, an Army veteran who was an interpreter in Vietnam before returning to New York, came up through the trial and appellate courts, and was appointed to the Court of Appeals by Gov. George Pataki.

But Manhattan federal Judge Valerie Caproni kept the trial on track by personally phoning the juror and telling her to come to court.

Although, he came to the tribunal voluntarily, he had sought to stop his trial at the high court, but failed.

An appeals court in Manhattan ruled that a reporter for The New York Times could not be subpoenaed to testify at a coming trial about her jailhouse interview with a man accused in the decades - old murder of a 4 - year - old known as Baby Hope.

The discovery of William Baah's deep involvement with the NPP comes at a time when members of Delta Force, a goon squad of the ruling party, had overthrown court proceedings and freed members of their group facing trial with the state going through the motions to sweep the case under the carpet.

U.S. District Court Judge Valerie Caproni has noted throughout the trial that the government's case is built almost entirely on circumstantial evidence, and her instructions to the jury will go a long way in determining how jurors come to assess Silver.

In their memo seeking bail pending appeal, they stated that if the court constrains the definition of an official act when it comes to trading favors, it's likely Silver's conviction will be reversed and a new trial will be ordered.

But despite Malloy's effort and that of his administration and other key Democrats, the CCJEF v. Rell will come to trial in January 2015 in Hartford Superior Court.

Samsung can still appeal to a higher court, and Samsung could still win when the case comes to trial.

Since most of the justification for the EPA ruling is based on the predictions of AGW, it will be interesting to see how the court rules, if it indeed comes to trial and a verdict is reached.

Known as the «Rocket Docket,» this court moves quickly in litigation, with most cases coming to trial (or being otherwise concluded) within 10 months after case filing.

Via Siouxsie Law I came across an interesting recent opinion of the Supreme Court of Georgia that reversed a murder conviction because the trial court allowed the prosecution to introduce «irrelevant and highly prejudicial character evidence» about a teenage defendant's «goth» lifesCourt of Georgia that reversed a murder conviction because the trial court allowed the prosecution to introduce «irrelevant and highly prejudicial character evidence» about a teenage defendant's «goth» lifescourt allowed the prosecution to introduce «irrelevant and highly prejudicial character evidence» about a teenage defendant's «goth» lifestyle.

Witness familiarisation does not come with a cast iron guarantee of success but when the day of trial arrives, the court fills, and all eyes are on the witness, familiarisation gives them the best possible opportunity to deliver their evidence well.

Have you come across court trials, depositions or government hearings that you think are surprising, bizarre or baffling — and lend themselves to performance?

In response to the argument that the trial judge had erred in declining to declare a mistrial the Court of Appeal found, oddly, that to allow a trial judge to ignore the juries findings would come perilously close to setting aside an award on the basis that it was inordinately high, which power is only reserved for the Court of Appeal.

At trial, attorneys sometimes want the jury to hear about reports and conclusions of treating doctors without actually having those treating doctors come to court to testify.

Instead, both parties come to a resolution outside of court when one party offers a specific compensation amount to the other party to avoid the trial process.

Our criminal courts are bottlenecked, daily dockets are jammed and early trial dates are hard to come by... This is not good for anyone.

Addressing concerns that mandatory Trial Management Conferences add unnecessary time and expense to litigation, Practice Direction 36 comes into force on September 4 which will allow parties to BC Supreme Court Civil and Family matters to apply to waive TMC's.

The court is to have regard to all the circumstances of the case including: the withdrawal grounds relied on and whether or not new evidence has come to light which was not available when the admission was made; the conduct of the parties including any conduct which led to the admission being made, any prejudice that may be caused if the admission is withdrawn and if withdrawal is refused, the stage in the proceedings at which the application to withdraw is made, in particular in relation to the trial date; the prospects of success (if withdrawal) for the claimant; and the interests of the administration of justice.

A McKenzie friend The phrase McKenzie friend comes from the 1970 Court of Appeal case McKenzie v McKenzie -LRB-[1970] 3 All ER 1034) in which a husband acting in person in contested divorce proceedings successfully appealed the decision of the lower court to deny him the use of an assistant to take notes, quietly advise, and prompt him at the tCourt of Appeal case McKenzie v McKenzie -LRB-[1970] 3 All ER 1034) in which a husband acting in person in contested divorce proceedings successfully appealed the decision of the lower court to deny him the use of an assistant to take notes, quietly advise, and prompt him at the tcourt to deny him the use of an assistant to take notes, quietly advise, and prompt him at the trial.

I just came across this Bureau of Justice Statistics report, «Federal Tort Trials and Verdicts, 2002 - 03», released in August, showing that the number of tort trials concluded in U.S. district courts declined by nearly 80 percent from 1985 to 2003 — from 3,600 trials in 1985 to fewer than 800 trials inTrials and Verdicts, 2002 - 03», released in August, showing that the number of tort trials concluded in U.S. district courts declined by nearly 80 percent from 1985 to 2003 — from 3,600 trials in 1985 to fewer than 800 trials intrials concluded in U.S. district courts declined by nearly 80 percent from 1985 to 2003 — from 3,600 trials in 1985 to fewer than 800 trials intrials in 1985 to fewer than 800 trials intrials in 2003.

It was thought that it was contrary to this spirit of «full faith and credit» (in Morguard's words, sort of) and administrative simplicity to allow defendants to wait in the bushes while the original court held a trial — even in default of appearance — and then attack jurisdiction only when the judgment came to be enforced in a place where the defendant had assets.

This was after Humeston lost his first trial against Merck & Co. in 2005 but won a second chance from New Jersey Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee after new evidence came to light.

There are forums for virtually every venue, trial court and trial judge in 26 states and the District of Columbia, with plans to add the remaining states over the coming months.

Invariably the self - represented accused comes to court with only a rudimentary knowledge of the trial process, often influenced by misleading depictions from television shows and the movies.

Phase II — which never came to pass — was intended to see the integration of the two trial divisions into a single trial court, with the objective of eliminating the confusion within and duplication of court services.

The courts are trying to avoid the commenting and critiquing that comes with sensational trial [s]; they are trying to avoid the talking heads.

But the defendant later had reason to smile when an appeals court vacated the judgment in his case and ordered a new trial after Wilson's actions came to light.

Professor Richard Myers, in a piece entitled Restoring the Peers in the «Bulwark»: Blakely V. Washington and the Court's Jury Project, 83 North Carolina Law Review 1383 (June 2005), explores the reasons why a seemingly unusual coalition of Justices came together to champion jury trial rights in Apprendi and Blakely and Booker.

Furthermore, even if you decide to settle out of court before the case comes to trial, you may even be able to claim the costs of instructing expert witnesses from the other side.

The answer to this question comes as a surprise to many first - time accident victims, as the majority of motorcycle cases are settled out of court and do not go to trial.

we noted one of the signs of the coming Legal Profession Apocalypse, namely that a California federal court judge, without any provocation or precipitating incident whatsoever, ordered opposing counsels in a trial to preemptively draw up a «civility code» under which they would conduct themselves.

Many cases have come down where jurors disregarded the court's instructions and posted on social media about the trial, but the court did not find the misconduct severe enough to declare a mistrial.

That is not a problem because the Supreme Court's mandate, having granted leave, is to make the decision that ought to have been made by the lower court from which the appeal comes; or order a new trial if that is the proper decision (if the decision appealed from was «against the weight of the evidence); or remand the appeal or any part of the appeal to the court appealed from for additional consideration in accordance with the direction of the Court: the Supreme Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S - 26Court's mandate, having granted leave, is to make the decision that ought to have been made by the lower court from which the appeal comes; or order a new trial if that is the proper decision (if the decision appealed from was «against the weight of the evidence); or remand the appeal or any part of the appeal to the court appealed from for additional consideration in accordance with the direction of the Court: the Supreme Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S - 26court from which the appeal comes; or order a new trial if that is the proper decision (if the decision appealed from was «against the weight of the evidence); or remand the appeal or any part of the appeal to the court appealed from for additional consideration in accordance with the direction of the Court: the Supreme Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S - 26court appealed from for additional consideration in accordance with the direction of the Court: the Supreme Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S - 26Court: the Supreme Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S - 26Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S - 26, ss.

So construed question of law would include (without attempting anything like an exhaustive definition which would be impossible) questions touching the scope, effect or application of a rule of law which the courts apply in determining the rights of parties; and by long usage, the term question of law has come to be applied to questions which, when arising at a trial by a judge and jury, would fall exclusively to the judge for determination.»

We like to talk about Chinese Drywall because it highlights so very well the important role that civil courts and good trial lawyers play in getting not - so - easy - to - come - by justice for people.

While Bard's settlement efforts come after losing two trials, including one in which a California court ordered the mesh device maker to pay the plaintiff $ 5.5 million over its Avaulta implant.