Sentences with phrase «judge whether the resulting»

Not exact matches

7th US Circuit Court of Appeals nominee Amy Coney Barrett, a Notre Dame law professor, was questioned intensely about her Catholic faith as a result of past writings expressing her beliefs on whether Catholic judges should recuse themselves from death - penalty cases if they believed they would be unable to impartially uphold the law, writing that — in limited situations — judges should step back in cases that conflict with their personal conscience.

The formal system is judged on the basis of whether or not on its intended interpretation the resulting theorems coincide with the assertions of the theory.

The standard by which emerging democracies are judged is not whether they hold elections, but whether the losers respect the result.

Whether he realises, for example, «what has happened just [as a result of using] that phrase, «Who am I to judge?

A research community that has no moral standards for directing its investigations or judging the results, that has no way of knowing whether it really knows anything at all, and that saddles human beings with expectations and demands that they (being human and not divine) are constitutionally incapable of fulfilling is in desperate circumstances.

Arsene Wenger has been speaking to Bein Sports about the constant speculation about whether he is going to be replaced as Arsenal manager in the near future, and he thinks he is being targeted because of his age and length of time but he also agrees that he will judged on the results, which admittedly haven't been too good this season.

A Suffolk judge has granted a motion requested by the pickup driver involved in the fatal limousine crash in Cutchogue last year to hold a hearing to determine whether blood alcohol results were properly taken.

Leaving aside the question of whether this is simply due to easier exams, it's clear that this increased «attainment» is not resulting in greater employability — so the reported 65 % increase in education funding since Labour came to power can not be judged a good investment, by any stretch of the imagination.

Their statement, issued April 30, the first day of testing in the 432,000 - student system, argues that this spring's test results can not be used fairly to judge whether students should be promoted or sent to summer school, and whether schools should be penalized for year - to - year variations in test averages.

Data are required by teachers to judge whether particular teaching strategies have resulted in better learning.

As a governance board, my colleagues and I don't get to create the plan; we only judge the results and then decide whether the project was successful.

Results centered trading judges the quality of the trading on whether money was made or lost.

Science should not be judged based on whether we like or can use the results, but whether the study plausibly has added any new information to the scientific corpus.

Certainly, when judging whether a method is valid, one should look at the details of the method, its justification, intermediate quantities like the prior, as well as the final result.

The only ultimate ground for comparison is the final result, and the only ultimate judge is whether the results accord with common sense.

On further thinking I judged that one should be able to determine whether a UHI effect can be detected under calm and windy conditions by looking at major US cities for the summer months (Parker claims that summer conditions should enhance the UHI effects and thus the resulting calm / windy effects on Tmin) and plotting the daily changes in average wind velocity versus the change in Tmin and the change Tmax - Tmin.

So the ultimate way of judging the validity of statistical methods is to apply them in relatively simple contexts (such as this) and check whether the results stand up to well - considered common sense scrutiny.

Readers are entitled to full disclosure of the adverse results and then judge for themselves whether they are persuaded by the Wahl and Ammann high frequency - low frequency argument.

Whether this is a plausible result is another question (outside of my expertise to judge), but I think I understand your point now.

Failure to attribute sources and lack of originality, without more, do not assist in answering the ultimate question — whether a reasonable person would conclude from the copying that the judge did not put her mind to the issues to be decided, resulting in an unfair trial.

Unfortunately, there are no guarantees on whether or not you would be compensated under this law, as a judge or jury determines the results on a case - to - case basis.

The judge asked whether my client's eyes could have been bloodshot from his having been upset rather than as a result of alcohol use.

Where the judge is satisfied he has all the relevant material before him and that the parties can argue the point fully, he ought to grasp the nettle and decide the point, since the question of whether or not there is a reasonable prospect of success will depend on the result of the construction issue.

If there are only seven judges sitting and it ends in a split decision will that result in questions from counsel as to whether two more judges would have made a difference?

The hearings are also likely to result in judges performing «very fact - specific inquiries» before deciding whether to grant leave, says Linda Fuerst, a senior partner at Norton Rose Fulbright LLP in Toronto.

(12) In an action for loss or damage from bodily injury or death arising directly or indirectly from the use or operation of an automobile, a judge shall, on motion made before trial with the consent of the parties or in accordance with an order of a judge who conducts a pre-trial conference, determine for the purpose of subsections (3) and (5) whether, as a result of the use or operation of the automobile, the injured person has died or has sustained,

A «living tree» court may of course choose to uphold a prior ruling, but its decision to do so will hinge not on whether the case was decided correctly in the first instance, but rather whether the result remains compatible with society's values, as interpreted by the judges themselves.

STANLEY BURNTON LJ: The issues for determination were: (i) whether the rule requiring payment of the standard case fee was unreasonable and unlawful; (ii) whether or not the ombudsman was under an obligation to consider dismissal of all complaints under DISP 3.3; (iii) whether the ombudsman could lawfully delegate consideration and exercise of the power under DISP 3.3 to a suitably qualified member of staff; (iv) whether the district judge had been entitled to find that each of the complaints had been considered for summary dismissal, albeit by a consumer consultant; (v) if a complaint was not lawfully considered for summary dismissal, and as a result was investigated, and after investigation determined by the ombudsman adversely to the complainant, whether the firm was nonetheless liable to pay the standard case fee; and (vi) whether the answer to (v) depended on whether the complaint should have been dismissed under DISP 3.3.

The result of that, for all practical purposes — it took about a year — was that an «Ivory Snow pure» number of trial judges stopped formally using Athey material contribution to decide whether factual causation was established on the balance of probability.

D appealed but the appeal was dismissed holding that the trial judge did not introduce new test or place additional onus on D in determining whether presumption of resulting trust was rebutted, but rather, looked at evidence from common sense perspective

The trial judge was therefore required to presume the advance was not a gift and to determine whether the respondent had satisfied the burden of rebutting the presumption of resulting trust on a balance of probabilities (para. 44).

As a result, the motion judge was asked to consider whether the damage resulting from Pleasantview's failure to appropriately seal the home from water damage was covered.

Although this was a well - intentioned effort to expedite matters and to reduce costs to the justice system, the trial judge, as the ultimate guardian of trial fairness, ought to have considered whether such a process could produce a just result in the circumstances.

Woodmere (Credit Valley) v. Sarcevich (1998), 40 O.R. (3d) 543 - although a lien was grossly exaggerated, it did not result in a successful claim for damages, since the trial judge found that the amount of the lien did not result in any damages (rather the fact of the lien, which would have existed whether the lien claimant claimed the correct amount) was what drove the purchasers of the property away, since the purchasers were looking for an excuse not to close.

Second, Judge Robinson explains that, though a Blakely - implicated and factually - disputed gun enhancement was arguably applicable, «whether or not the gun enhancement is applied, application of the career offender guideline results in an increase to Level 34» in the determination of the defendant's offense level.

The analysis requires the judge to determine whether «there is admissible evidence which could, if it were believed, result in a conviction».

In confirming the decision of the Motions Judge, the Court of Appeal described the test from Sagaz as a dual inquiry as to whether the new evidence, if presented at trial, would probably have changed the result, and whether the evidence could have been obtained before trial by the exercise of reasonable diligence.

Furthermore, the Court of Appeal determined that, even if the Application Judge was in error with respect to whether there had been reductions in space rented by the Appellant, such an error was ``... not one which would have affected the result» since both the evidence and conduct of the parties suggested ``... whenever a change to the Lease was sought the parties negotiated the terms and entered into a written agreement».

Great results are largely dependent upon a lawyer's ability to develop and communicate a compelling, easily understandable and credible story that will persuade the audience, whether it be a judge, jury or panel of academia members.

From an independence perspective, it makes no difference whether the re-selection is done by popular election or reappointment; in both cases judges are made answerable — accountable — for their decisions to an institution that is concerned with political results far more than with legal principle.»

After concluding that the Chairman had no power to decertify the election results, the judge then considered whether the court should invalidate the election, on the basis that that invalid proxies had been used.

Decision Makers and Decision Recipients: Understanding Disparities in the Meaning of Fairness Diane Sivasubramaniam and Larry Heuer, Court Review 44 (2007) This article reviews the results of several quantitative studies that look at whether decision makers such as judges are impacted by procedural fairness in the same way that decision recipients are.

A somewhat inevitable consequence of a judge hearing submissions on whether the media should be allowed to attend is an increase in the costs of each party, despite the fact that media attendance may be made with no notice to either party and in the middle of a hearing, resulting in unexpected delay and costs.

As Richard Posner says in his Reflections on Judging, the bench and the bar share a lack of familiarity with the sciences, whether social or natural and, worse, a lack of curiosity that results in an unwillingness to investigate the backgrounds against which legal rules operate, to go beyond the «common sense» assumptions which may bear little, if any, resemblance to the scientific truth.

The admissibility of the fresh evidence turns on whether that evidence, considered with the rest of the evidence adduced at trial, could be expected to have affected the result or, more specifically, could be expected to have affected the trial judge's assessment of Mr. Narine's credibility: see Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters v. Ontario (Ministry of Natural Resources), [2002] O.J. No. 1445, at para. 63.

I strongly believe that you will likely end up with a similar result whether you fight, fight, fight and spend many tens of thousands of dollars on an aggressive attorney or you negotiate effectively with an attorney who is a skilled negotiator, but also has excellent writing and oral argument skills to present your case strongly to the assigned judge.