Sentences with phrase «n't see you in court»

He unleashed umpteen 140 character tweets one after the other and having washed his mouth out with soap what follows may not see us in court!

Last month, in «We Won't See You in Court: The Era of Tort Lawsuits Is Waning,» the Wall Street Journal took a look at the decline in tort lawsuit filings and the reasons fueling the decline, citing «state restrictions on litigation, the increasing cost of bringing suits, improved auto safety, and a long campaign by businesses to turn public opinion against plaintiffs and their lawyers.»

Last month, in «We Won't See You in Court: The Era of Tort Lawsuits Is Waning,» the Wall Street Journal took a look at the decline in tort lawsuit filings and the reasons fueling the decline, citing «state restrictions on litigation, the increasing cost of bringing suits, improved auto safety, and a long campaign by...

Not exact matches

«This is not a policy we support, and I would note that it has already been challenged in federal court, and some of the order has been enjoined at least temporarily,» Blankfein said, according to a transcript seen by Reuters.

About a decade later, I ran into an old friend — someone who had helped me prepare for the Supreme Court interview, whom I hadn't seen in years.

For example, the criminal judge may tire of seeing the perpetrator back in court over financial issues, or the perpetrator may convince the court that he or she can't pay.

Circuit Court Judge Pamela Campbell has ruled that only the jury may see it, and not others in the courtroom or watching online.

But tens of thousands of student borrowers could see their debt wiped out, because at least one private lending company's paperwork is either lost or disorganized — and therefore it can't actually prove in court that the debts actually still exist.

Here's something you may not know about court cases: There are often people in the public gallery who are paid to closely watch the members of the jury to see how they react to different witnesses.

Katz says that in the event Unblock Us was ever taken to court, it might be able to argue «fair dealing» as a defence on the grounds that it is providing content Canadians would otherwise not get to see and for which there is no justifiable reason.

«The bottom line is I don't think you're going to see the status quo prevail in any event, regardless of the court case.

An immigration judge can not quiz asylum seekers on religious doctrine to see if they are credible about their faith, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reiterated in a January ruling.

As for your seriously off base torture comparison, if we saw a drastic increase in violent crimes, and there was a public outcry for harsher punishments to try and serve as a deterrent, and the Bill was drafted, made open to the public, and the solid majority of the population didn't turn against it with protests, signatures, and contacting their representatives; maybe a torture law could make it (though it would never get past the Supreme Court as the Consttution is now, but we'll let that slide as a hypothetical).

«The parents have to take responsibility for this child - apart from one case I have not seen any father or mother in court,» he said.»

As I see it, the U.S. Supreme Court is not going to outlaw prayer in the U.S. Congress or in town board meetings.

I can not discuss them all here, but the following references are a start: Theodore de Laguna, review of The Principles of Natural Knowledge in Philosophical Review, 29 (1920), 269; Bertrand Russell, review of Science and the Modern World in Nation and Athenaeum, 39 (May 29,1926), 207; Charles Hartshorne, Creativity in American Philosophy (New York: Paragon House, 1984), 5,32,279 - 280; and even though Stephen Pepper believes both Whitehead and Bergson are mistaken in their views, he believes they are extremely similar: see Pepper, Concept and Quality: A World Hypothesis (LaSalle: Open Court, 1967), 340 - 341.

If angry atheists find the Ground Zero cross makes them sick and they are angry they have to battle it in court, tell them just wait till you stand before that God you don't believe in, explaining why they didn't believe in Him and see how sick they feel then!

And most importantly, you don't see groups made up of reasonable religious people legally fighting against their counterparts in the courts.

The fact that the courts disagreed is an indication to me that this state still has a long way to go, (and while I agree totally with Oso), I see it's not, in the real world, as simple as he sees it.

Of course from my stand point I refuse to accept that he will be pay in the after - life, thus the reason we don't leave this sort of stuff for «god» to deal with, the courts see it similarly... if god is all powerful and all knowing he would never have allowed this to happen in the first place.

I'm not going to fill my posts with sweetness and light when I can sure as hell bet that my views would be dismissed (and have been dismissed, see the recent debacle on the «toasted gay» thread) as prejudiced and ordered out of court, a priori, in an instant.

Even the hallowed phrase that the First Amendment built «a wall of separation between church and state» saw the light of day not in a court ruling or piece of legislation, but in a letter from President Jefferson to the Danbury, Connecticut, Baptist Association in 1802.

This problem has proved to be too much for the courts; it is a serious one, and I would not want to see the religious right in a position to determine what is pornography.

We have atheists hanging banners in Times Square, taken prayer out of school, out of the Military, out of gov.. We have seen the 10 Commandments removed from these same places, We have see a simple desert cross taken down and not allowed to be put back up and once the battle had finally been won in courts the O admin would not erect it back.

Something I haven't seen anybody mention before is that even though the government does establish nor prohibits religion (Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment,) the system of laws can inadvertently end up being setup to practically prohibit being a Christian by the advocacy of certain groups who go above and beyond to have the courts rule in such matters.

Do yuou see any Christian groups standing outside of the family courts holding signs that say «God hates Divorce» (which is actually in the bible, while God hates Homosexuality is not) or «Divorced People go to Hell».

The judge asked if I agreed with my attorney, and my attorney had to elbow me in the ribs because he could see my attention was riveted not on the judge but instead upon the bombshell babe doing the court recording.

He's a grizzled vet, he sees thing on the court not everyone sees and helps us make in game adjustments.

In that both Joker and Bird not only have incredible court vision It's their ability to «anticipate» the action, the see «opportunity» before anyone else Its's like a 6th sense and few have it

Team Zimmerman Kyle Nelson was physically drained after shouldering a ton in the first two Games and really didn't see the court in much of this one..

Yet when the 6» 9», 245 - pound Williams demands the ball in the post, clear - cuts the lane for a rebound or runs the length of the court to block a shot, as he did to stuff Musketeers guard Dedrick Finn last week, you can see the burn - off from an inner fire, if not the flame itself.

For the previous two years, whenever Michelle was frustrated or angry on the court, whenever her high school coach yanked her midway through the third quarter because he didn't believe in stars or 40 - point scoring nights, all she had to do was look up in the stands and see her mother forming that little T with her forefingers.

And not only will that aspect of it be fun, but it will be cool to see Harden share the court again with his former teammates in Durant and Westbrook.

I don't see any reason the Pistons can't win 48 games or more and get home court in the first round.

Tyronn Lue might be able to apply full - court pressure, but I don't see them getting it from first - round pick Reece Gaines, a 6» 6» guard from Louisville who will have a hard enough time proving that he can handle the point in the NBA....

I'll wait to see what transpires in court before fully condemning Foster, the charges surprised most everyone including Foster's lawyers, hope the DA isn't trying to hang Foster to pad his resume on the coat tails of the Me Too Movement.

Anyway ball in pellegrinis court... He'll throw in Dzeko or jovatich... But can see why they bought bony pity our idiot can't see weaknesses in our team and act accordingly

Sitting on the sofa, I show him a few items: newspaper and magazine pieces about the Liston fights; Ali's conversion to Islam; the arrest for refusing military induction; the epic first battle with Frazier; the Supreme Court overturning the draft conviction; Foreman being voodooed by Ali; the Thrilla in Manila; the boxing lesson he gave Spinks in their second contest; a recent article about Ali buying buses for Chicago - area public schools (immediately after seeing a TV news story about how Dade County had no money for new buses, Ali sat down, wrote a check and mailed it, not using the gift as a tax deduction); and one about helping a young man wearing a hooded dark sweatshirt and jeans who crawled out on a high window ledge of a Wilshire Boulevard skyscraper in Los Angeles to kill himself.

Meanwhile, a former AD's son doesn't see the need to remove himself from a ruling that could have theoretically involved his father over in Chapel Hill and said ruling is overturned unanimously by the NC Court of Appeals.

We know he's been able to stay on guys like Curry and CP3 before for great defensive plays, we haven't seen him doing it during a whole game, but in this sense, covering a main ballhandler requires more skill and less decission making / court awareness than staying behind watching to help or staying.

The Kings were 3.5 point dogs in Denver on January 3rd, but with the way Nikola Jokic is playing and with no more Boogie, it wouldn't be surprising to see the Kings as 6 points dogs or so despite having home court.

to lennart... badminton's not only about technique... shon hustles around on court like nobody else without any mistake (look at the olympics 04 semi final)... that is his play... i also saw him live in berlin... he is now the korean junior coach and we had an international tournament were he was on court a bit... he has a good technique even if you do nt believe it...

Irony is, I don't hate women in general but after dating online, you can see women who lived with their husbands until their house was paid off or their schools loans paid and or both and then had the court take his kids away and put his ass out on the street as part of a divorce settlement along with a substantial awarding of monies.

Now there are various ways that you can get those convictions expunged, but it's much more difficult if it has already become a public record, and if your child has been convicted of a DUI in juvenile court, even though that is not accessible to the general public, the DMV will be able to see that conviction and may refuse to give your child the license for some period of time, based on that conviction.

Having Parental Responsibility does not, in itself, entitle a parent to live with or see their child; but a father who has it may be regarded more favourably by a court, if this issue comes to it.

Knowing fully well that you will be our guardian angel and guide the Supreme Court Justices to see the pot of gold in breastfeeding not the green bucks of the milk companies and prod them to sign the passage of the final verdict on the revised IRR of the Milk Code (en toto) as Christmas gift.

Losing a case of this kind in the courts should not be seen as tax avoidance by the taxpayer or as enabling avoidance by their advisers.»

As we've seen from the recent debates about US Supreme Court judges, in a well - functioning democracy one doesn't debate new Penal Codes with judges.

My interest in this whole issue comes from the fact that if our law courts especially the highest court in Ghana, Supreme Court that is supposed to be final place in the country to deliver justice to all manner of persons regardless of one's political affiliation, religious beliefs, ethnic background etc in a just and fair manner is now seen to be turning into a place where citizens of Ghana who may belong to certain political affiliations do not feel confident or have trust in their handling of critical national issues in view of some of these «partisan» pronouncements on the part of some justices, then where would we be heading towards as a coucourt in Ghana, Supreme Court that is supposed to be final place in the country to deliver justice to all manner of persons regardless of one's political affiliation, religious beliefs, ethnic background etc in a just and fair manner is now seen to be turning into a place where citizens of Ghana who may belong to certain political affiliations do not feel confident or have trust in their handling of critical national issues in view of some of these «partisan» pronouncements on the part of some justices, then where would we be heading towards as a couCourt that is supposed to be final place in the country to deliver justice to all manner of persons regardless of one's political affiliation, religious beliefs, ethnic background etc in a just and fair manner is now seen to be turning into a place where citizens of Ghana who may belong to certain political affiliations do not feel confident or have trust in their handling of critical national issues in view of some of these «partisan» pronouncements on the part of some justices, then where would we be heading towards as a country?

Any sentence imposed by the court should not be seen as an attempt by judges to muzzle journalists because freedom must go with exercising responsibility which was lacking in the case of Montie FM 3.