For those coming into my office for the first time,
we generally discuss the process of getting divorce.
Not exact matches
Just as
Process and Reality
discusses the world, bringing in God insofar as God is necessary to account for (this) world, Ford sought at first to
discuss God more
generally, bringing in (this) world only insofar as it was necessary to account for God.
It is precisely for this reason that, after
discussing the indeterminism of natural
processes, I added the following proviso: «If we add to this (as free will theists should) that God
generally refrains from exerting direct control over such indeterministic natural
processes... etc.» I am well aware that some theological determinists combine their view with an acceptance of indeterminism in nature.
The collaborative divorce
process will typically bring together a set of qualified professionals to
discuss and resolve all issues that
generally arise in divorce proceedings, including issues related to minor children and the distribution of finances and personal property.
I
generally put the words «collection», «organisation» and «interpretation» randomly on the board first and we
discuss which order they should go in when dealing with the
process of gathering information.
When
discussing his conceptual
process, Bavington stated «I
generally read sheet music and start with that as a sketch.
As a side note, claiming «fabrication» in a nefarious way doesn't help, and
generally turns people off to open debate on the issue because the
process of infilling missing data wasn't designed at the beginning to be have any nefarious motive; it was designed to make the monthly data usable when small data dropouts are seen, like we
discussed in part 1 and showed the B - 91 form with missing data from volunteer data.
Mr. Sirota offers quite a bit to chew on in just over 1000 words, but his argument, as I understand it, boils down to the following propositions: 1) Judges must
generally apply the law as written and should work to foster stable legal doctrine, 2) In applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic
process failures,» meaning that the legislative
process is not properly responding to the changing will of the people (Mr. Sirota also
discusses briefly the circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedents.
The Development of Parenting Coordination and an Examination of Policies and Practices in Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta
discusses the practice of parenting coordination in Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario, compares
processes and training standards in those provinces, and makes recommendations for the practice of parenting coordination in Alberta, and in Canada
generally.
This Comment joins other work in arguing that the legitimacy of stare decisis depends upon widespread publication.4 The doctrine of stare decisis itself emerged only with the consistent and reliable publication of court opinions, 5 and legal
processes that do not result in the issuance of publicly available opinions, such as settlements and arbitrations,
generally lack stare decisis norms altogether.6 Although previous scholarship has
discussed the proper role of stare decisis in the context of «unpublished» opinions, 7 which make up around eighty percent of all United States courts of appeals opinions8 (and are usually publicly available despite their name), 9 this Comment provides the first examination of the tenability of stare decisis as applied to truly secret opinions like those of the FISC.
Generally, when a conversation veers towards a client's children and divorce, most people
discuss how the children are handling the
process, and how helpless they feel to stop the pain and disillusionment their children are going through.
The collaborative divorce
process will typically bring together a set of qualified professionals to
discuss and resolve all issues that
generally arise in divorce proceedings, including issues related to minor children and the distribution of finances and personal property.