Sentences with phrase «judicial fact finding»

It is true that judges do not have to remain passive, or to divest themselves of all their experience which assists them in their judicial fact finding.

Well... I think Thomas's closing was just a little sloppy — he should have said that the the judge made two errors: using judicial fact finding to boost the sentence and then going below a mandatory guideline regime.

Although Markman assigned claim construction to the trial judge, it did not expressly state whether factual findings subsumed in that issue are subject to de novo review (as normally would be the case for legal rulings) or to review for «clear error» (as normally would apply to judicial fact findings).

Not exact matches

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Holds that Judges Must Issue Findings of Fact when Setting Unaffordable Bail for Indigent Defendants.

While I find the majority opinion in Brown disappointing and even more so the fact that its author was Scalia, in the end there is something for conservatives to take away from the case: a strong judicial precedent that new categories may not be added to the type of content not afforded full First Amendment protection.

Yet, though An Inconvenient Truth was adjudged to be «substantially founded upon scientific research and fact,» judicial note was made of nine specific «exaggerations.»

In addition, the idea that jurors can find law as well as fact is not inconsistent with judicial review for excessive damages.

The Court of Appeals could, however, ask for the assignment of a retired judge to handle discovery issues, reviewing the evidence, making proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, and perform «any other necessary related judicial duties».

Similar expressions, giving specific recognition to the fact that judicial action is to be regarded as action of the State for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment, are to be found in numerous cases which have been more recently decided.

In doing so, he said he felt comfortable falling in line with one judicial line of thought that says judges can make findings of fact in order to grant summary judgment.

But the raise may come with an added cost of its own: a ban on judicial junkets (ABC.com, 2/4/08), i.e., those all - expense paid trips and lavish gifts funded by special interest groups, and disguised as seemingly benign «fact - finding missions» or educational seminars.

The SCC has indeed set a low standard for decision writing, noting that the scope for judicial creativity is «narrow, but not non-existent»: «it finds expression in the ordering of the reasons and the disposition of the arguments and issues, and in the occasional eloquent statement of the facts or restatement of the law.»

In their submissions on this motion, the carriers appear to be under the mistaken impression that an appeal is available on errors of fact or that this is a judicial review proceeding where the remedy for an omission to make a relevant finding of fact would be to remit the case back to the trier of fact.

In his dissenting opinion joined by Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Clarence Thomas expressed doubt that «Congress intended administrative preclusion to apply to TTAB findings of fact in a subsequent trademark infringement suit,» based on the history of administrative preclusion and both the express language and «several features» of the Lanham Act, including that the Act confers limited authority on the TTAB and provides for judicial review of the Board's decisions.

Findings: The results of the deliberations of a court or jury; the decisions expressed by a judicial authority after consideration of all the facts.

In theory, you could take sort of a hybrid approach that allows for judicial fact - finding and reliance on acquitted and uncharged conduct, but without having those facts determine the applicable guidelines range.

But, whatever the realities surrounding the USSC's legal (non) position on severability, I think the USSC undermines its own description of its institutional role and work if it does not soon disseminate at least some preliminary data about how many federal sentences in fact turn on judicial fact - finding of sentence enhancing facts.

To paraphrase Lambert J.A. in Nichols, where statements of counsel stand alone, it will be a rare case that such statements will be sufficient to justify a finding of fact that would permit the exercise of judicial discretion.

The only question for me is, why didn't the Booker remedial opinion keep the Guidelines mandatory but just bar judicial fact - finding.

Although judicial factfinding in sentencing is standard and allowed since Booker made the guidelines nonmandatory, the judicial factfinding assumes an even greater role here given that the decision of even what basic guideline to apply hinges on what offense the judge finds is proven by the facts.

Four justices disagreed, finding that Eiler's behavior did in fact undermine the public's trust in the judicial system.

The problem with this reconceptualization of the Apprendi rationale is that the reason we would want to make a distinction between formal, overt and publicly - ascertainable judge - found facts, on the one hand, and informal, under - the - radar judicial fact - finding, on the other, is far from obvious.

Taylor v. Charter Medical Corp., 162 F. 3d 827 (C.A. 5 (Tex.), 1998) even though a court may take judicial notice of a «document filed in another court... to establish the fact of such litigation and related filings,» 12 a court can not take judicial notice of the factual findings of another court.

On the other hand, if the JCC issues a finding of fact that the complained of actions of the judge were not judicial acts, (i.e. a violation of the criminal code) then the judge should not be protected by judicial immunity.

On the other hand, if the JCC issues a finding of fact that the complained of actions of the judge were not judicial acts, then the judge should not be protected by judicial immunity.

This is so because (1) such findings do not constitute facts «not subject to reasonable dispute» within the meaning of Rule 201; 13 and (2) «were [it] permissible for a court to take judicial notice of a fact merely because it had been found to be true in some other action, the doctrine of collateral estoppel would be superfluous.»

The Tribunal also dismissed the College's arguments that the complainant's failure to pursue a judicial review of the HPARB decision and the fact that she no longer had conditions on her licenses were relevant to whether or not the complaint was an abuse of process, finding that the need for the complainant to have her complaint appropriately considered under the Code outweighed other policy considerations (¶ 61).

In addition to the fact that the custody court generally has no business reopening cases where there are convictions, judicial findings or admissions, the assumption is also wrong that most custody evaluators have any expertise in making determinations about abuse.