Sentences with phrase «courts of law usually»

Not exact matches

The report of another person's words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

In religious courts the judge usually passes judgment according to the canonical interpretation of the school of law which the suitors follow.

More detailed studies of the Traditions, Arabic works of law, and the regulations of the shari`a concerning problems usually submitted to Islamic courts of justice — such as appointing the time for the beginning and end of the fast, matrimonial law, hereditary law — are available in Malay for students in the pesantrens.

Council speaker Christine Quinn, usually a staunch Bloomberg ally, is furious at the administration's court attempt to knock down a city law limiting the size of homeless shelters to 200 beds.

The statement added, «The EFCC boss expressed concern over the delay usually experienced in dispensing corruption cases and the conspiracy (in some cases) between the criminals and judicial workers / law enforcement agents to make violators of law escape justice, citing the case of a former governor of Adamawa State, Bala Ngilari, who was set free with the connivance of a prison warder and court registrar after being convicted by court.»

Fair use relies on factors that can only be determined on a case - by - case basis, usually in a court of law.

To be sure, there is an outside chance that some portion of these guidances will be rejected in court, but it takes a strong stomach to risk the heavy sanctions that the government will impose if it prevails, as it usually does now that these guidances are part of the basic regulatory toolkit in every area from food - and - drug to environmental law.

This means that if to some extent your debt problem has become a legal problem, a debt settlement company (usually a law firm or a company with expert lawyers) will be able to reach an agreement with the creditors and take your debt problem out of courts.

Any time you petition a court for a special reason, like filing a motion for violation of the bankruptcy laws, there are usually court costs that are associated with the petition.

Reopening a bankruptcy after it has been discharged is usually best done by a professional like a bankruptcy attorney who understands the complexities of the bankruptcy laws associated with addressing a bankruptcy court.

In addition, if any sale contract disputes arise, they usually have to be settled in a court of law located within the breeder's state of residence.

The inventor usually knows this and will take a moment before bringing a costly suit against a worthy competitor who would be able to show the invalidity of the claim in the court of law.

These are usually cleared up fairly easily, by providing the non-Native courts the law and authority upfront, but there are many jurisdictions that have no experience in Native American law and are often surprised when the see the complexity of the practice and the high quality of the work that is being done in tribal courts.

While the Canadian Bar Association is usually busy intervening in court cases, making submissions to government, commenting on proposed legislation and supporting members, it's not every day that the CBA is called upon to help the public understand the nuances of a pressing national issue which raises concerns about the rule of law.

Through tradition and custom, rather than any specific law, the defendant will remain in the dock, usually located at the back of court, (a position that has come under challenge in the European Court of Human Rigcourt, (a position that has come under challenge in the European Court of Human RigCourt of Human Rights).

In other words, the sites guarantee that the text that a searcher finds there (usually the PDF version) is a correct statement of the law and is admissible as evidence in court.

A Note is an in - depth analysis of a particular field of law and usually concludes by suggesting how the courts should decide future cases or by proposing new legislation.

One of the oddities of family law, at least from a client's perspective, is that while the client may view «their case» in the singular, in reality, there may be several separate strands before the court, for example, the divorce (usually straightforward), financial provision (generally one application before the court, but with the potential to branch off down different routes particularly if enforcement is required), and arrangements for any children (hopefully, in most cases, capable of agreement without proceedings being issued, but sometimes not).

Another limitation is that you will usually have to rely on local or state courts, though it is possible to litigate in federal courts if the infringer resides in a different state and the amount in the case exceeds $ 75,000, or if the case depends on an interpretation of federal law (most importantly the Lanham Act).

Although smaller firms know what they want in a reporter, finding the time and resources to determine whether a reporter meets their qualifications can prove difficult, and usually results in their using one of two methods to find the right reporters: seeking professional references from other law firms that require litigation services, or seeking reporters through the aid of court reporter firms.

Now let me tag five blawgers: Steve Matthews for Vancouver Law Librarian Blog and so much more; Rob Hyndman for his eponymous (yeah, I had to look it up) blaw on politics, technology and law; Michel - Adrien Sheppard, Supreme Court of Canada librarian, whose Library Boy blog usually gets there first; Tom Mighell of InterAlia, who points us to so many blawgs that it would be interesting to see him facing in another direction for a while; and, never one to ignore the obvious, I tag Sabrina Pacifici, who needs no epithet and neither does her blawg, LLRX.cLaw Librarian Blog and so much more; Rob Hyndman for his eponymous (yeah, I had to look it up) blaw on politics, technology and law; Michel - Adrien Sheppard, Supreme Court of Canada librarian, whose Library Boy blog usually gets there first; Tom Mighell of InterAlia, who points us to so many blawgs that it would be interesting to see him facing in another direction for a while; and, never one to ignore the obvious, I tag Sabrina Pacifici, who needs no epithet and neither does her blawg, LLRX.claw; Michel - Adrien Sheppard, Supreme Court of Canada librarian, whose Library Boy blog usually gets there first; Tom Mighell of InterAlia, who points us to so many blawgs that it would be interesting to see him facing in another direction for a while; and, never one to ignore the obvious, I tag Sabrina Pacifici, who needs no epithet and neither does her blawg, LLRX.com.

SRLs just think that lawyers are manipulating the system to delay their matter and confuse them, and complain that when they bring forward something that they believe to be important to the merits (rightly or wrongly, and usually because they have read about it in a case or on a law website) they are regularly told that they are wasting the court's time (ironically, often because they are speaking to the merits, when the motion requires them to only address the colour of opposing counsel's socks).

The success of mediation is heartening — the resolution of family law disputes through the courts has always struck me as an option of truly last resort — however mediation generally comes at a cost, whereas litigating in the provincial court is usually free.

The applicable law on appeal is usually settled, with the parties devoting much of their energies to convincing the court that the facts fall into one line of cases versus another.

He has also represented immigration clients in numerous U.S. District Courts (usually involving law enforcement and ICE violations of constitutional protections) and has represented immigration appellants before the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Fifth Circuit (New Orleans), the Sixth Circuit (Cincinnati) and the Ninth Circuit (San Francisco).

Family law cases are usually reserved for state court, but increasingly, the federal courts have been used to decide child abduction cases, that is, whether the child should be returned to the country of habitual residence (see Habitual Residence), but not to decide which party wins custody.

... in some parts of some provinces, namely Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Ontario and Saskatchewan, there is just one court for family law disputes Making matters worse, not all courts can deal with all laws and the two trial courts usually have different rules, different processes, different forms and different fee structures.

The judge will usually not let them use a cause strike, saying that an attorney is ethical enough to apply the facts to the law and not sway the jury based on their personal biases that everyone has; plus, we're officers of the court so we have a duty to be ethical.

In the common law contracting process the contracting parties need to expressly agree all the essential terms of the contract as there are relatively few terms implied into contracts, either by the common law or statute, and the circumstances in which the court will consider implying an essential term into a contract to render it complete and enforceable are very limited (usually requiring that the missing clause had been in the contemplation of the parties during the contracting process but inadvertently omitted when the contract was concluded).

Whenever possible, it is usually in a plaintiff's interest to have a case filed in a court of law rather than through arbitration.

People often tell me they want a legal separation and usually they are referring to two things: one, what family law lawyers in the family courts consider being separated, which is also referred to as the date of separation; and two, a -LSB-...]

People often tell me they want a legal separation and usually they are referring to two things: one, what family law lawyers in the family courts consider being separated, which is also referred to as the date of separation; and two, a separation agreement.

In some ways, the logic of costs is questionable because a matter that has to go to court, especially when each side is represented by a lawyer, usually implies that a point in law, as it framed within the facts of the case, is uncertain and requires judicial interpretation.

A typical day might involve meeting with clients, researching the law, going to immigration court or an immigration office, and writing briefs to higher courts: the Board of Immigration Appeals, the tribunal that sits above the immigration courts, and above that, to the United States Court of Appeals, usually the 4th Circuit Court of Appcourt or an immigration office, and writing briefs to higher courts: the Board of Immigration Appeals, the tribunal that sits above the immigration courts, and above that, to the United States Court of Appeals, usually the 4th Circuit Court of AppCourt of Appeals, usually the 4th Circuit Court of AppCourt of Appeals.

However, as indicated previously, these were primarily social occasions, combined with reports about the business of the Court, interspersed with lectures — usually delivered by magistrates — on the law.

Due to the fact that its group of leading appellate legal representatives probably made it based upon their expertise in appellate law usually, this list is far from Supreme Court particular.

«The above maxim is usually applied in law where reliance is placed by a party on deeds or writings which are not produced in court, and the loss of which can not be accounted for or supplied in the manner which the law has prescribed, in which case they are to be treated precisely as if non-existent.»

While the legal avenues available to you will be determined by the laws of your state and local community, the courts can usually help a sexual harassment victim by:

This would generally be true in most U.S. jurisdictions usually as part of unauthorized practice of law rules promulgated by a state supreme court.

The traditional tests for the validity of a marriage in Canada (which adopted the rules established by the English courts in the nineteenth century) was that a marriage had to be valid (i) where it was performed, by the lex loci celebrationis, and (ii) by the law of the parties» ante-nuptial domicile, usually referred to as the question of «essential validity».

1) we agree to disagree:) 2) supremacy of EU law for the EU system is the equivalent of the hard core of constitutional values that some national Courts defend against EU (and ECHR)- it is not a matter of «legitimacy» or «patriotism» but of using a «lower rank» instrument (accession treaty) to interfere with a treaty rule: the identical issue is for States who have a «rigid» constitution (alike the Treaty binds the CIEU): the accession treaty to ECHR or EU has a «lower rank» than the Constitution itself, so that the national Constitutional Court can not accept it can derogate to a higher ranking rule - usually they will find a way to reconcile the «construction» of the two set of rules, but if they are requested of an opinion on the point of principle, they will always say that in the very end, if all other paths have been explored to avoid the conflict, eventually it is the Constitution and neither ECHR nor EUwhich prevails.

And be it further enacted, That all the said courts of the United States shall have power to grant new trials, in cases where there has been a trial by jury for reasons for which new trials have usually been granted in the courts of law; and shall have power to impose and administer all necessary oaths or affirmations, and to punish by fine or imprisonment, at the discretion of said courts, all contempts of authority in any cause or hearing before the same; and to make and establish all necessary rules for the orderly conducting business in the said courts, provided such rules are not repugnant to the laws of the United States.

Apart from that, the best I could usually offer was a description of the range of probably results, based on my knowledge of the legislation, the case law interpreting that legislation and my gut sense of the court's likely approach to my client's legal issues in the totality of the circumstances.

Experienced family law attorneys usually encourage their clients to try to resolve their family law issues outside of the court system, whenever possible.

Arkansas law also provides for attorneys ad litem, court - approved investigators — usually licensed attorneys — who will conduct a deeper investigation into the suitability of each parent for primary physical custody.

If the combined income of the couple is less than $ 75,000, as of 2012 state law, the court will usually award temporary maintenance if one spouse earns a lot more than the other spouse.

In these situations, the unrelated adult usually has no parental rights, but they can still become the legal guardian of their partner's children through adoption or if the non-custodial parent is either deceased or deemed unfit or guilty of abandonment in a court of law.

When one considers that arguing attorneys and family law judges typically learn about Parental Alienation via arguments, examinations and cross examinations in court, it should not be surprising that such understandings are usually limited to the facts of a particular case, and are not necessarily characteristic of specific knowledge acquisition.

A temporary family law order is usually the type of restraining order most people use during divorce, and it encompasses many areas not covered by the other kinds of court orders.

The divorcing parties are usually encouraged to obtain legal counsel for the purpose of providing answers to specific questions of law, to review the terms of their agreement from a legal standpoint, and to prepare any documents to be filed with a court.