Sentences with phrase «justice for litigants»

During his term, Sandy worked tirelessly to bring awareness to the need for increased legislative funding for these programs and to explore ways the courts and the legal aid community could better work together to improve equal access to justice for all litigants.

This meeting was held among leaders of the Massachusetts Bar Association, the Boston Bar Association, legal aid providers, and the Chief Justice to discuss the crucial importance of funding legal aid for the poor and to explore ways the Court and the legal aid community can work together to improve equal access to justice for all litigants.

• Increased access to justice for litigants.

Not exact matches

As for my part, I am filing a complaint with the Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice and asking her and The Court to mark Tony Jones as a Vexatious Litigant in that state (he has to get judicial approval to sue); asking The Court to take action against Tony Jones» attorney's (M. Sue Wilson's) law license; and asking the Court to order an investigation into the family court judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue Wilson.

8 Obvious horse sense — especially if you are not too sure about the administration of justice in your local court — but it was not just practical advice for litigants.

The more campaign contributions from business interests justices receive, the more likely they are to vote for business litigants appearing before them in court.

Associate Justice Robert Wodrow Archbald (United States Commerce Court) and Judge (Third Circuit Court of Appeals) for improper acceptance of gifts from litigants and attorneys.

Anita Earls, executive director of the Durham - based Southern Coalition for Social Justice and a litigant for plaintiffs in the case, suggests Kagan's ruling on the congressional districts could be a signal.

Mr Justice Collins & IS: good legal aid news for family litigants & protected parties says David Burrows

P.P.S. I also believe that a properly designed dispute resolution system would not greatly impact lawyer incomes because significantly reducing the time and therefore the cost of resolving disputes would make that process affordable for those court - clogging hordes of self - represented litigants and many other justice seekers besides.

I would venture to suggest that any sensible regime for appeals, particularly from justices, should not merely be comprehensive but also be simple and readily comprehensible both to litigants in person and, dare I say it, also to court staff.

The fact that the majority of Canadians can not afford to seek justice through the current system is a problem which far outstrips in magnitude concerns about maximizing procedural and due process protections for those litigants who are presently able to access the system.

Sponsored by a British barrister who once worked for Advocate General van Gerven, the litigants aim to ask the Court of Justice whether they should continue to enjoy their Union citizenship rights even after ceasing to be formally Union citizens as a result of Brexit.

A Texas justice of the peace has received a public warning for his daily proclamation, «This is a redneck court,» after a complaint from a Hispanic litigant.

A few years ago I was doing some work for a professional association on guidelines for dealing with litigants without counsel and I was struck by the extent to which some legal professionals regard litigants without counsel as interlopers who gum up the finely tuned, well - oiled machine that is their justice system.

See also: (1) «Access to Justice: A Critique of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada's Inventory of Access to Legal Services Initiatives of the Law Societies of Canada» (pdf; posted on the SSRN on, May 21, 2014); and, (2) «Self - Represented Litigants» Tax Money Provides More Funding for Legal Aid Ontario,» (posted on Slaw, on July 31, 2015).

«It is essential for justice that a successful litigant is able to recover reasonable legal costs, instead of a pre-determined fixed sum.

«One of the reasons I started this campaign was because I kept getting calls from litigants looking for services at a lower price, so I'm excited that we're finally going to get access to justice for people with family law problems who can't afford a lawyer,» says Yarmus, who runs Toronto - based Civil Litigations Paralegal Services.

In a session presented by the AALS section on Technology, Law & Legal Education, John Mayer, executive director of the Center for Computer Assisted Legal Instruction (CALI) discussed A2J Author (Access to Justice Author), cloud - based software for taking complex legal information from legal forms and presenting it in a straightforward way to self - represented litigants.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a Alaska injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

There are lawyers in the Ministry who sincerely care about making the justice system work better for litigants.

A 2013 report to the Arkansas Access to Justice Commission confirms this situation specifically for self - represented litigants in Arkansas, where Amber and Ryan were divorced.

Moreover, one could imagine different judges concluding (1) that court fees are never permissible or (2) that exemptions are not always necessary or (3) that this particular fees regime was reasonable because it allowed for exemptions for impoverished litigants; indeed, the regime aimed to strike a delicate balance between the interests of individual litigants and the public interest in effective, efficient access to justice (see Rothstein J.'s dissent, paras. 103 - 112).

Greacen, John M. «Services for Self - Represented Litigants in Arkansas: A Report to the Arkansas Access to Justice Commission.»

The Alberta «QB Amicus» program is an excellent example of the collaboration and innovation that is emerging as a result of increased attention being paid to access to justice issues for self - represented litigants.

It is also commendable that the Justices in the Court of Appeal made it possible for Mr. Mabirizi to get his message across by guiding him accordingly during the proceedings, unlike in some court rooms which can be very intimidating especially to the self - litigant.

The message to insurers and other litigants is that society can not afford a Rolls Royce justice system for all levels of claim, which means more ADR paid for by the parties, not the state.

A2J Author ® is a software tool developed in the U.S. that delivers greater access to justice for self - represented litigants by enabling non-technical authors from the courts, clerk's offices, legal services programs, and website editors to rapidly build and implement customer friendly web - based interfaces for document assembly.

Provided the efficient administration of justice is unlikely to be compromised, and the circumstances of the case do not render it unfair, a genuine request by a litigant for assistance is likely to be considered favourably.

Lenczner's message was that sophisticated litigants are leaving the civil justice system in droves, opting for private arbitration.

«A2J Author is a software tool that delivers greater access to justice for self - represented litigants by enabling non-technical authors from the courts, clerk's offices, legal services programs, and website editors rapidly to build and implement customer friendly web - based interfaces for document assembly.

«It leads to increased costs and delays for the justice system and overburdened courts and backlogs, as self - represented litigants try to navigate a very complex legal system,» says Track.

With virtually no accountability to anyone, perhaps its time for the justice system to take a page out of the private sector and make the system operate for the clients (litigants) as opposed to the judges, court staff and lawyers who operate in it.

This change in attitude has exciting prospects for practitioners and litigants in enhancing access to justice, and is particularly suited to facilitating competition law private actions.

However, it must be borne in mind that the justice system is not our system, a system for judges and lawyers, but their system, a system that belongs to the users of the system, the litigants themselves.

[1] For recent discussions on self - represented litigants and the justice system, see e.g. Julie Macfarlane, The National Self - Represented Litigants Project: Identifying and Meeting the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants, Final Report (May 2013); Trevor C. W. Farrow et al., Addressing the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, March 201For recent discussions on self - represented litigants and the justice system, see e.g. Julie Macfarlane, The National Self - Represented Litigants Project: Identifying and Meeting the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants, Final Report (May 2013); Trevor C. W. Farrow et al., Addressing the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, Marlitigants and the justice system, see e.g. Julie Macfarlane, The National Self - Represented Litigants Project: Identifying and Meeting the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants, Final Report (May 2013); Trevor C. W. Farrow et al., Addressing the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, Marchjustice system, see e.g. Julie Macfarlane, The National Self - Represented Litigants Project: Identifying and Meeting the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants, Final Report (May 2013); Trevor C. W. Farrow et al., Addressing the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, MarLitigants Project: Identifying and Meeting the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants, Final Report (May 2013); Trevor C. W. Farrow et al., Addressing the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, MarLitigants, Final Report (May 2013); Trevor C. W. Farrow et al., Addressing the Needs of Self - Represented Litigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, MarLitigants in the Canadian Justice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, MarchJustice System, a White Paper prepared for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, March 201for the Association of Canadian Court Administrators (ACCA)(Toronto and Edmonton: ACCA, March 2012).

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a Georgia injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

It impacts on the decision and strategy on whether to litigate even with a meritorious claim, and is becoming an issue of access to justice, especially for impecunious litigants who are disproportionally affected by the recovery gap.

In a case that illustrates the desperation of self - represented litigants in family courts, Rhonda Nordlander, also known as Rhonda Nordlander - Nalli in court documents, asked the court to allow her to be represented for free by a person who dubs himself «a family justice advocate.»

In the spirit of resolute movement forward, I offer two ideas imported from the old world — one relatively challenging and the other relatively mundane — for balancing the scales of justice for Canadian civil and family litigants:

One of the justifications for a local final appellate court was that it would enhance access to justice as litigants would not have to bear the costs of travel to the United Kingdom.

He explained that like many other states, «Oregon has been promoting pro bono service for at least a generation, but the access - to - justice gap keeps growing» as self - represented litigants top 80 percent for family law and landlord - tenant.

There is a massive difference between a vexatious litigant (a litigant who abuses the justice system or purposely pursues a strategy designed to defeat the justice system) and a self represented litigant (a person who engages the justice system on their own behalf, for whatever reason).

At the same time, the Supreme Court should recognize that deference to other branches of government is essential for the proper functioning of Canada's constitutional order, and governments — like all other litigants — are entitled to efficient access to justice.

By doing so, the lawyer is able to offer affordable fixed quotes for strictly defined tasks, which enables a self - represented litigant to get full control over their legal budget while at the same time getting the benefit of affordable access to justice for the limited tasks that they can't handle on their own.

One thing I see as inevitable is the need to reform justice processes so that they are much more manageable and accessible for self - represented litigants.

Pretty much every report on self - represented litigants, from the work of the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family to the Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters to the CBA's Envisioning Equal Justice Initiative to the National Self - represented Litigants Project, agrees that the cost of legal representation is the number one barrier to accessiblelitigants, from the work of the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family to the Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters to the CBA's Envisioning Equal Justice Initiative to the National Self - represented Litigants Project, agrees that the cost of legal representation is the number one barrier to accessible jJustice in Civil and Family Matters to the CBA's Envisioning Equal Justice Initiative to the National Self - represented Litigants Project, agrees that the cost of legal representation is the number one barrier to accessible jJustice Initiative to the National Self - represented Litigants Project, agrees that the cost of legal representation is the number one barrier to accessibleLitigants Project, agrees that the cost of legal representation is the number one barrier to accessible justicejustice.

If the Woolf scheme were to be delivered as intended by the courts, it would provide an even better system for parties keen for swift and affordable outcomes than at present, and it has always been a truism for Lord Woolf that it is for the benefit of litigants that our civil justice system must unswervingly be directed.

The Nova Scotia Department of Justice surveyed 58 litigants without counsel for its 2004 report Self - represented Litigants in Novlitigants without counsel for its 2004 report Self - represented Litigants in NovLitigants in Nova Scotia.

This column is an unintended and rather abstract follow - up to my last column entitled «Self - Represented Litigants Are Not Things» on the need for reformers to better consider the unique «real life» perspectives of lay litigants when redesigning justice system rules and pLitigants Are Not Things» on the need for reformers to better consider the unique «real life» perspectives of lay litigants when redesigning justice system rules and plitigants when redesigning justice system rules and processes.