Sentences with phrase «compel parties in a case»

The judge's hesitation to invoking the All Writs Act, a 1789 law that gives judges power to compel parties in a case to turn over evidence, led Apple to question whether the application of the act was valid.

Not exact matches

Whilst his views on the environment are not to everyone's taste, this Platform piece which he wrote for ConHome during party conference week makes a compelling civil libertarian case for reducing the amount of state regulation in our lives.

Lawyers should counsel their clients just because the mediator may spend more time in the opposing parties» room, that does not necessarily mean that the mediator believes the other side has the more compelling case.

The motions judge in SC v. NS concluded that the act of one lawyer for a client sharing the opposing party's compelled discovery evidence — in this case, documents — with another lawyer representing the same client in another related proceeding constitutes prohibited «use» of the evidence.

An exception should only be found where the documents sought are both relevant, and necessary in the circumstances of the case to achieve either the agreement of the parties to the settlement, or another compelling or overriding interest of justice.

Whilst the case does not in fact establish any new case law, it serves as a compelling reminder that the mutual trust and cooperation obligation does not require parties to act any differently under NEC3 than with other forms of construction contracts and should not be held as an axe to discourage a party in circumstances where it may have a valid claim.

With over 40 years of combined experience representing injury victims in Kentucky, Indiana and Tennessee, our lawyers know how much your claim is worth, and we know how to prepare and present a compelling case that proves the other party's negligence and justifies payment of the full amount of compensation owed.

If I offer a fixed - price «contested» divorce, for example, then the incentive for the client is to make full - use of that pricing model and to regularly and repeatedly want to: 1) talk about their case (i.e., their evil spouse's latest antics) on the phone or in - person; 2) file more motions to get their spouse to do something, to prevent their spouse from doing something, or to object to something the court ruled; 3) send more «demand letters» or make more phone calls to the opposing party or their attorney to tell them to return the car seat, or to complain that they dropped off the child 15 minutes late, etc; and 4) respond to ad hoc motions from the other side (motions for attorney's fees, motions to compel discovery, motions for summary disposition, motions to enforce, etc).

It could in some cases bring a claim for an injunction compelling the other party to abide by the contract, or choose to accept the breach of contract and bring a money claim to recover its losses.

* The name of the case, the identity of the party we represent, and how to bill the time; * The issue that needs to be answered; * The facts of the case I think are most pertinent to the issue; * The procedural posture of the case and how the work product will be used — for a motion to compel, for a response to a motion for summary judgment, for an evaluation letter to the client, etc. * Whether I think the issue has been researched at any other time in the office, and how to find the old research; * The result I want to reach, i.e., what I'd like the answer to be, if possible.

Sadly, it is not uncommon for self - represented parties to lose a case merely because they did not understand the law or failed to present a coherent legal argument despite having very compelling facts in their favour.

Save in cases of fraud, a receiving party can not be compelled to produce privileged material, even if the material is to be produced only to the court.

If a party in a divorce case disobeys an order established in a divorce decree, the other party may file a motion to compel compliance.

While a court mediator may have the ability to negotiate legally binding decisions, the mediator himself does not issue a decision, nor does he compel either party to make a decision in a case.

What this meant in practice, was that Texas child visitations would be approached from the perspective of both parties having equal rights, unless there were some compelling reasons why this shouldn't be the case (such as for reasons of violent conduct or abusive relationships.)