Sentences with phrase «into judicial opinions»

Sullivan observes that the use of «disgruntled» to describe employees is creeping beyond defense counsel's briefs and into judicial opinions.

With all of the hype surrounding Star Wars: The Force Awakens, it should come as no surprise that Star Wars references are seeping into judicial opinions.

Not exact matches

(c) As to transactions entered into after May 20, 1996, a creditor shall have no liability under this chapter for any act or practice done or omitted in conformity with any (i) regulation of the administrator, or (ii) any rule, regulation, interpretation, or approval of any applicable Alabama or federal agency or any opinion of the Attorney General, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, the regulation, rule, interpretation, opinion, or approval is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason; provided, however, that any interpretation or opinion issued after May 20, 1996, shall not have any effect on any litigation pending on May 20, 1996, nor shall any interpretation or opinion issued after May 20, 1996, have any effect on litigation if issued subsequent to filing of the litigation.

I urge you to buy the book, not so much because I need the money for my end of the case (which I do) but because when a sclerotic and dysfunctional judicial system co-operates with a cynical and fraudulent plaintiff in turning the DC courts into a 21st century version of trial by ordeal, it is more important than ever to push back by disseminating as widely as possible the opinions of him that Mann is trying to suppress.

[127] Professor Piché in her text Fairness in Class Action Settlements, supra at pp. 179 - 80 summarizes the various factors for the settlement approval test into seven factors; i.e.: (1) judicial risk analysis: likelihood of recovery, or likelihood of success on the merits weighed against amount and form of settlement relief; (2) future expense, complexity and likely duration of litigation; (3) class reaction: number and nature of objections; (4) recommendations and experience of counsel and opinion of interested persons; (5) adequacy of representation: good faith and absence of collusion; (6) discovery evidence sufficient for «effective representation» and (7) adequacy of notice of proposed settlement to absent class members.

Rather, everyone understands that such practices are de rigueur because the senior folks are simply way too busy handling other senior - level tasks to undertake the very time - consuming process of researching all of the relevant facts and legal issues pertinent to a judicial opinion, legal brief, or law journal article, and crafting all that raw material into persuasive prose.

This article, while not about opinion writing, does venture into the minds of lay and judicial decision - makers.

A first - year law student who has never had the opportunity to disagree with a professor or to independently form opinions about cultures based on their art, literature, or music will almost certainly struggle to synthesize seemingly inconsistent judicial opinions into a cogent legal principle.

While this is an excellent reference for all legal writers, the short section on writing judicial opinions does not go into sufficient depth for courses on judicial opinion writing.

19th - and early - 20th - Century judicial opinions are also littered with man - ending nouns, which cemented the acceptability of some of these words as legal terms of art into the minds of impressionable law students.

Just as sports analogies, movie lines, and song lyrics have found their way into lawyers» briefs and judicial opinions, Star Trek and its intergalactic wisdom have permeated our jurisprudence as well.

To be practice - ready, law students need to be able to find and evaluate a broad range of legal sources.72 A short Standalone E-memo assignment provides an ideal opportunity to move beyond the traditional sources of law in first - year legal writing courses — judicial opinions and statutes — and branch out into different sources of enacted law.

For those interested in embedding opinion content into existing theories of judicial decision making... consider Yonatan Lupu & James Fowler's paper recently posted to the SSRN.

Moreover, doctrinal entrenchment is particularly problematic in the FISA courts, where secrecy and institutional context indicate that outside efforts at doctrinal reform are less likely to be effective than they are with courts that publish their opinions.35 Unlike published opinions, secret opinions can not provoke the public into lobbying for a legislative override36 or judicial overruling37 — two important paths of legal reform.38 Perhaps to hedge against the risks of limited external oversight, FISA limits FISC and Court of Review judges to non-renewable, seven - year terms, 39 a provision suggesting that Congress envisioned a FISA court whose membership would be responsive to shifting factual circumstances and policy priorities.40 Stare decisis, which requires judges to adhere to interpretations of law that they might otherwise reject as unjust or unpersuasive, constrains these judges» ability to adapt to such factual and policy shifts.

Defenses of stare decisis usually fall into one of three categories: 1) it promotes the rule of law; 41 2) it promotes the appearance of the rule of law; 42 or 3) it expresses judicial deference to the legislative branch by allowing Congress to correct interpretations of law it finds faulty.43 A closer examination of each of these justifications reveals their basic inapplicability to secret opinions.

I must have read too many Judge Posner opinions before starting my judicial clerkship for a judge serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, because early on I added into a draft opinion a passage that would have ordered an attorney to show cause for violating an important rule.

The routine conversion of judicial citations to electronic pathways out from the text and targets for citator links into opinions has a direct bearing on optimal citation placement or so it seems to me.

In a recent opinion piece, ACLU legislative counsel Neema Singh Guliani argues that the CLOUD Act sidesteps oversight from both the legislative and judicial branches, granting the attorney general and the state department too much discretion in choosing which governments the U.S. will enter into a data exchange agreement with.