If this is Everyday Law, a site designed to make common legal issues intelligible, law review journals are like Never - y - day Law, meant to grind fine
legal points completely into dust — and dust bins — as they marinate on shelves, obscure, arcane and unread.
Not exact matches
Cohen's lawyer, Stephen Ryan, said that the raid was «
completely inappropriate and unnecessary» and
pointed out that attorney - client privilege may shield many of Cohen's files from investigators, a
legal concept that protects communication between lawyers and their clients.
At one
point, he called it «this
completely legal arrangement.»
A note on my
completely not - at - all rigorous testing mechanism: for each Word alternative, I stuffed a heavily formatted
legal document — headers, bullet
points, footnotes, signature blocks, you name it — into the program to see if it would play nice with an existing Word document.
It follows that we are almost there in finally clarifying English law, but a case dealing with the same
point as in Sattva is arguably needed to clarify the appellate role and send the required signal to the commercial and
legal world that the factual content can never be
completely shut out.
I also made the
point that PLE is not a panacea that
completely removes the need for
legal aid.
Their selling
points are unique, but
completely foreign to the way lawyers conduct
legal research today.
Client comments as published in the
legal directories and guides include: «A first - class mind and clearly a silk in the making»; «a QC in waiting»; «a very bright, uber - responsive, rising star»; «formidable advocate able to stand up to commercial silks and senior juniors»; «an extremely impressive and effective advocate who gets on top of things extremely fast and is quick on his feet»; «complete grasp of all current developments, strategic input and forceful yet polite cross-examination»; «undoubted star junior who goes well past the extra mile in preparing his cases»; «brilliant,
completely committed to the brief; a great all - rounder»; «intellectually very strong»; «very sharp and to the
point»; «ringing endorsements from the market»; «impressive and knows his stuff»; «razor sharp
legal skills»; «comes up with extremely clever
points» with an ability «to handle hearings with utmost self - possession and confidence and produce some first - class advocacy»; «a thorough and thoughtful advocate who has an agreeable but tough courtroom manner»; «very proactive and, once instructed, takes control of a case and pushes it forward to the advantage of the client»; «has the ability to sift through complex
legal problems, and present practical
legal solutions that not only win you the battles, but also the war»; «very commercial and savvy»; «infectious passion for the law»; «his commitment to his work is outstanding»; «relentless energy and precise attention to detail make him invaluable.»
I agree that
pointing a gun at someone is a lesser crime than shooting at someone (if unjustified), what I meant is that there is no situation when
pointing the gun at someone would be
completely legal but shooting wouldn't.
At this
point, mediation is no longer an option as the trust has broken down and the
legal system is needed to compel the withholding party to be
completely forthright about these hidden assets or out of wedlock children.