Sentences with phrase «consider about your judge»

Some other things to consider about your judge are whether he / she is technically savvy (or whether he / she merely believes him (her) self to be so)?

Not exact matches

Consider: 20 years ago, the ad campaign judged most effective in America was about the perils of switching dog food.

There were no test tubes or Bunsen burners, but a courtroom turned into a science classroom Wednesday for a U.S. judge considering lawsuits that accuse big oil companies of lying about the role of fossil fuels in the Earth's warming environment.

I'm not dogmatic about Judas» final fate, that one was up to God — but consider the possibility that God doesn't judge things in the same manner that we humans do.

The exclamation point was stamped on our conviction to do something about our situation when we attended a talk at our parish by a monsignor who acts as a judge of the canon law tribunal in our diocese, considering annulment cases.

Not all atheist are created equal just like all Christians are not the same so before you say things like «atheism is so sad», please consider that you really do not know what you are talking about and it is not your place to judge how I think or feel.

Considering how intellectualy stimulating this video is, I am going to assume you only like it because it allows you to blindly judge others, thus allowing you to feel more comfortable about yourself.

Lawyers and judges do not (and should not) engage in philosophical discussions about what they (in their individual consciences) consider to be morally right.

Hicks writes: «Lawyers and judges do not (and should not) engage in philosophical discussions about what they (in their individual consciences) consider to be morally right.»

That's pretty amazing, considering we're talking about 650 products entered, with a panel of more than 100 judges.

@Muda, Sorry about Monaco, its Anderlecht, my bad, my bad... @ArsenalGenes — That Einstein Quote — «If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will consider itself whole life stupid»..

You man not consider it moral, but this posting was about not judging other women for their choices.

Last night, not long after Magistrate Judge and special redistricting master Roanne Mann grilled legislative lawyers about the merits of considering incumbency, she released a set of proposed maps that seems to take the current configuration of congressional districts as a very loose template, but with some significant changes for a number of existing office - holders.

On Thursday afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge Joan M. Azrack spent more than two hours giving instructions to the jury, reading aloud from 54 pages explaining the law and how jurors should go about considering each charge the defendants face.

At the end of January, the judge, Nicholas Garaufis, said he would consider Trump's «incendiary» comments about the Latino community when making a decision.

One can make whatever argument you wishes to the House considering an impeachment, or to the Senate trying an impeachment, but ultimately, this would be about convincing representatives and senators to agree with your argument, not convincing a judge (although a judge does preside over a Presidential impeachment and senators might be inclined to defer to the rulings of that judge).

This should make our Christian leaders know that we must not always judge people by their past deeds and what people think about them but consider their current actions and willingness to change for the best.

It's considered a social anxiety disorder, which causes people to feel so worried about being judged and embarrassed in social situations that they avoid them altogether.

I described myself as cool and casual individual, I am highly sophisticated and honest in everything i do, i do care a lot about my appearance and i always like to look good and smell nice, i don't judge a book by the cover and do not consider distance or age as barrier in relationship.

If effectiveness must be the measuring stick by which we judge activist documentaries, then consider the impact of Lyric R. Cabral and David Felix Sutcliffe's (T) ERROR, about the FBI's post-9 / 11 efforts to identify and deter potential domestic terrorists before they act.

Or do we want them to think carefully about what they say or write especially in front of others, considering all of the options they're given from every angle and to look deeper before they judge?

The judge said the decision about whether to hold a judicial review should be heard in open court, after privately considering the merits of the application.

Based on this analysis, Judge Frank then considered what Price's financial prospects would likely be over the next five years — about 70 percent of the remaining repayment period.

oit is with indignation that we are speaking othis document is not acceptable • Bolivia owe have learned about this document through the media, not through you onow we are given 60 minutes to accept something already agreed upon by other states owe are seeing actions in a dictatorial way othis is unacceptable and anti-democratic owe say to the people of the world: they shall judge upon it othe rights of our people are not being respected owe are not going to decide about so many lives in only 60 minutes othis is s group of a small number of countries oAPPLAUS • Cuba o4 hours ago Obama announced an agreement which is non-existant owe is behaving like an emperor owe have seen version being discussed by secretive groups in the last hours and days oCuba will not accept your draft declaration oat this conference, there is no consensus on this document oI associate my voice to Tuvalu, Venezuela, Bolivia othe target of 2 degrees is unacceptable o... • Costa Rica ofor the reasons that we have heard, this document can not be considered the work of the AWG - LCA and can not be considered by the COP othis can only be an INF doc, it's just for information oadditional question: in an earlier version, a CP.15 - decision, para. 1: there was a reference to a legally binding instrument to be adopted by the COP onow: we have a new version, but the reference to legally binding instrument disappeared • USA o [wants to speak, but point of order by Nicaragua] • Nicaragua othere is already a precedent where we have not been given the right to speech onow that you have mentioned we finally want to speak • Pres. [moving on] oUS does not appear on my list any more, so next one is Sudan • Sudan othere must be something horribly wrong here oI pushed the button when I saw Nicaragua raising their sign in order to support them • Nicaragua othis is a deterioration of the democratic system oand this happens at the most important conference of the UN for many years owe have draft decisions about how to carry forward the process ostates (lists names) have written a submission: • this has not followed the basic principles of the UN • inclusion • bottom up processes • democratic participation • equality of states oduring this consequence, many states expressed their position against such approaches othe only agreement we recognize is??

Even though I'm riled up about what appear to be weird inconsistencies when it comes to judging the ethical behavior of scientists, it's good to consider all the possibilities before seizing on any one theory concerning Lindzen.

Consider for example how satellite data have made it possible to better analyze hurricane tracks allowing to judge about hurricane motion with some certainty a few days in advance, something entirely unavailable for the ancient weather forecasters.

If we can consider the Cowtan Way data set the more correct then I would judge that it will require some major rethinking about the Arctic polar amplification and the operating mechanism (s).

James Hansen, the director of the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies who first warned the world about the dangers of climate change in the 1980s, has joined other scientists in submitting statements to be considered by a judge at the Information Rights Tribunal on Friday... James Hansen told the Guardian: «Our children and grandchildren will judge those who have misled the public, allowing fossil fuel emissions to continue almost unfettered, as guilty of crimes against humanity and nature... If successful, the FOI request may, by exposing one link in a devious manipulation of public opinion, start a process that allows the public to be aware of what is happening, what is at stake, and where the public interest lies.»»

Also, the judge is within his rights to punish the potential juror if he determines that the potential juror is actually lying about his ability to be impartial in an effort to evade jury service rather than because he sincerely believes that he can't be fair, and judges have wide authority to determine the credibility and truthfulness of statements made to him in open court (i.e. if the trial judge finds that you are lying, this determination will almost always be honored by an appellate court considering the judge's actions).

23 It is clear from his Reasons that the trial judge not only sympathized with Ms. M. but also agonized about convicting her, considering that «she had no intention of causing the harm that she did».

He went on the circuit bench, and he's regarded as just about the best judge in the circuit, and the Fifth Circuit has done a good job, generally considering.

Considering what a mess the Monday testimony and lawyer argument on the effect of the new claim construction was (because, frankly, both parties had previously hedged their bets as they didn't know what the appeals court would do), the jury is probably now very confused about it (and Judge Koh did the right thing by denying both parties» motions for judgment as a matter of law since there are reasonable arguments for and against infringement, for and against validity).

But the judge reading the lawyer's brief doesn't care a whit about whether the lawyer was surprised that the court considered extrinsic evidence; the judge cares only that the court considered it, and wants to know how that ruling affects the case before him.

Furthermore, in my view, it is preferable for the appellate judge who becomes aware of an Internet posting about a pending case, written by someone with particular expertise in the area of the law at issue, to read the posting instead of refusing to consider it.

The trial judge considered that some of the inducements offered, and particularly promises of help in getting the appellants» children back from social services, did raise concerns about the reliability of the statements obtained.

After hearing all the witnesses and considering all the evidence, the judge will issue findings of fact and a legal decision about whether a parent can move away with the children.

The information about insurance came out at trial, at which point the trial judge called an immediate recess to consider the evidence of insurance which had just entered the case.

The problem with this level of detail about what might influence a judgment of believability is that it encourages people to think that any factor not mentioned should not be considered (after all, the judge didn't say «or anything else that you think reasonably bears on believability»).

[77] Nonetheless, to make a finding of causation based on a robust and pragmatic approach, in my view, it was incumbent on the trial judge to consider and make findings about the evidence relevant to the medical issues.

Where the reasons for the judge's decision are allegedly inadequate, a party should generally invite him to consider whether to amplify them before complaining about their inadequacy in the Court of Appeal.

There has been considerable evolution (and confusion) about how exactly to approach the best interests of the children when a move is proposed, specifically with regard to what scenarios a Judge is allowed to consider when deciding what is best for the Children.

It does not take a leap of imagination to consider the likely press speculation about material being considered behind closed doors in CMP in a high profile case, nor the likely comment on the role of the judge sitting.

Stated at its simplest, the matter of Zabel is about a man who served as a judge for 27 years, presided over thousands of cases in an unblemished career and who made the biggest mistake of his life — «an ill - considered joke,» supposedly to bring «lightness» to his courtroom.

In O'Hare, the judge considered that the test articulated in Montgomery was the most appropriate given that expert evidence indicated that there was little consensus in the financial services industry at the time of the advice about how a financial adviser should manage a client's attitude towards the treatment of risk.

In addition, I began to worry about what I would be like as a judge after 30 - 40 years on the bench and so I started to consider other options.

Considering many factors, including Detective Sergeant Van Allen's high public profile, the rules and normal vetting practices by lawyers and judges concerning Expert Witnesses, and the fact that Van Allen's affidavit and redacted invoices were clearly suspect on their face to any ordinary person let alone lawyers and judges, it is unbelievable that nobody in that courtroom knew the truth about Van Allen or otherwise cared to find out.»

Perhaps more important, some individual judges are starting to lay out rules for lawyers about what will be considered valid forensic evidence and what forensic witnesses will be able to claim about their findings.

This is what Judge Koh's tentative final jury instructions would say about the relevant factors and how to consider them:

Epstein JA held that since the application judge considered all the evidence she was required to, her determination about the validity of the notices was entitled to deference.

I am far less intimidated about the prospect of contending with lawyers and judges in court now than I was in those days, but I don't underestimate the challenges, especially when considering taking on the CJC (and probably Justice Canada, that identified itself as the effective respondent to my first filing).