Sentences with phrase «of judicial education programs»

Based in Ottawa, the NJI is a world leader in the development and delivery of judicial education programs.

Not exact matches

At 1 p.m., the Third Judicial District Gender Fairness Committee presents a free continuing legal education program exploring the nuanced elements of elder abuse, New York State Bar Association, 1 Elk St., Albany.

Nevada's First Judicial District Court Judge James Wilson granted a preliminary injunction in the case of Lopez v. Schwartz earlier this month, halting the state's Education Savings Account Program (ESAP) established by Senate Bill (SB) 302.

He regularly lectures in the United States and abroad for industry groups, bar associations, and judicial education programs such as the Federal Judicial Conference and Florida College of Advanced Judicial judicial education programs such as the Federal Judicial Conference and Florida College of Advanced Judicial Judicial Conference and Florida College of Advanced Judicial Judicial Studies.

W. Milt Nuzum III (left), Director of the Judicial & Education Services Division, Dot Keil (middle), Education Program Manager with the Judicial College, Brian Farrington (right), statistics analyst with the Office of Court Services

She is a graduate of the Institute for Faculty Excellence in Judicial Education at the University of Memphis and is a frequent presenter at judicial education programs natJudicial Education at the University of Memphis and is a frequent presenter at judicial education programs naEducation at the University of Memphis and is a frequent presenter at judicial education programs natjudicial education programs naeducation programs nationwide.

It may recommend and assist in implementing programs related to judicial training, education and education of the public about the judicial system.

W. Milt Nuzum III (left), director of the Judicial & Education Services Division, Dot Keil (middle), education program manager with the Judicial College, and Brian Farrington (right), statistics analyst with the Office of CourtEducation Services Division, Dot Keil (middle), education program manager with the Judicial College, and Brian Farrington (right), statistics analyst with the Office of Courteducation program manager with the Judicial College, and Brian Farrington (right), statistics analyst with the Office of Court Services

Catherine has lectured for industry groups, bar associations, and judicial education programs such as the Florida College of Advanced Judicial judicial education programs such as the Florida College of Advanced Judicial Judicial Studies.

Previously, she served as the deputy director of the Judicial Programs and Services Division (2006 - 2011), which included court services, judicial education, and research and statisticJudicial Programs and Services Division (2006 - 2011), which included court services, judicial education, and research and statisticjudicial education, and research and statistics units.

He provided training to our pro bono staff in the development of protocols to screen potential clients, developed pleadings and Continuing Legal Education (CLE) training materials for our program and provided training to more than 50 attorneys in the 5th, 7th and 9th Judicial Circuits in representing clients in wage claim matters.

Thomson subsequently collaborated with Sandra Oxner, a Nova Scotia judge leading judicial education initiatives for the Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judges, to develop the first national program for family judges.

It also led to the formal training of a large group of judicial educators, among them a number who have gone on to national and international education programs: judges such as Katherine McLeod, Miriam Bloomenfeld and Joseph Bovard, to name but three.

Working with Chief Judge Fred Hayes, this committee kick - started a more comprehensive approach to judicial education, introducing new programming, including a week - long «University Judicial Education Program,» a collection of annual regional sentencing seminars conducted in four locales, and periodic visits to the Court ofjudicial education, introducing new programming, including a week - long «University Judicial Education Program,» a collection of annual regional sentencing seminars conducted in four locales, and periodic visits to the Court oeducation, introducing new programming, including a week - long «University Judicial Education Program,» a collection of annual regional sentencing seminars conducted in four locales, and periodic visits to the Court ofJudicial Education Program,» a collection of annual regional sentencing seminars conducted in four locales, and periodic visits to the Court oEducation Program,» a collection of annual regional sentencing seminars conducted in four locales, and periodic visits to the Court of Appeal.

According to Brian Lennox, «many of these programs were seen as truly innovative within the judicial community and have gone on to form the basis of education programs presented by other courts, national and international, and other judicial education organizations.»

The Courts of Justice Act permits the Judicial Council to require attendance at judicial education programming as a response to judicial misJudicial Council to require attendance at judicial education programming as a response to judicial misjudicial education programming as a response to judicial misjudicial misconduct.

Technology is an increasingly significant factor in the delivery of judicial services and education programs.

Ted (Andrews) sent me to a judicial education program in Reno, Nevada as part of the work to establish an education program for the family judges.

Justices of the peace are judicial officers, and all education programs and mentoring are based on that fact.

The key to the involvement of the National Judicial Institute was that the Court and its judges retained control over education and programming, while the NJI served in a significant advisory capacity.

The involvement of a Senior Advisor in the conception, design, development and presentation of programs has been critical to the evolution of judicial education within the Court.

In the early 1990s, Chief Judge Linden had begun relying on Lennox's skill in the realm of judicial education: «Any time an education program needed to be beefed up, I'd lean on Brian,» Linden recalled.

He refers to a group of judicial education and training assistants (JETAs) who organize the administrative and logistical details for the educational programs, seminars, workshops and conferences held throughout Ontario; and produce all the materials required for these sessions.

In addition, the education budget is also tapped to assist individual judges wishing to attend important education programs offered by other judicial education organizations, including the Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judges, the International Association of Women Judges, the Advocates» Society, the Association for Family Court Mediation, the Cambridge Lectures (offered by the Canadian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies), Osgoode Professional Development, and the NJI — to name a few.

In the process of evolution from the judicial education programming of the 1970s onwards, the University Program operated as an essential transition point and a proving ground for the dynamic, experiential judicial education of the modern Court.

Andrea has chaired several family law programs for professionals, and has spoken at various matrimonial law conferences including: Judicial Education Programs, The 6 - Minute Lawyer; the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Annual Conference; and The Ontario Bar Association Conferences for Family programs for professionals, and has spoken at various matrimonial law conferences including: Judicial Education Programs, The 6 - Minute Lawyer; the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Annual Conference; and The Ontario Bar Association Conferences for Family Programs, The 6 - Minute Lawyer; the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Annual Conference; and The Ontario Bar Association Conferences for Family Lawyers.

Legalize and Regulate Marijuana WHEREAS, despite almost a century of prohibition, millions of Canadians today regularly consume marijuana and other cannabis products; WHEREAS the failed prohibition of marijuana has exhausted countless billions of dollars spent on ineffective or incomplete enforcement and has resulted in unnecessarily dangerous and expensive congestion in our judicial system; WHEREAS various marijuana decriminalization or legalization policy prescriptions have been recommended by the 1969 - 72 Commission of Enquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs, the 2002 Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs, and the 2002 House of Commons Special Committee on the Non-Medical Use of Drugs; WHEREAS the legal status quo for the criminal regulation of marijuana continues to endanger Canadians by generating significant resources for gang - related violent criminal activity and weapons smuggling — a reality which could be very easily confronted by the regulation and legitimization of Canada's marijuana industry; BE IT RESOLVED that a new Liberal government will legalize marijuana and ensure the regulation and taxation of its production, distribution, and use, while enacting strict penalties for illegal trafficking, illegal importation and exportation, and impaired driving; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a new Liberal government will invest significant resources in prevention and education programs designed to promote awareness of the health risks and consequences of marijuana use and dependency, especially amongst youth; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a new Liberal government will extend amnesty to all Canadians previously convicted of simple and minimal marijuana possession, and ensure the elimination of all criminal records related thereto; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a new Liberal government will work with the provinces and local governments of Canada on a coordinated regulatory approach to marijuana which maintains significant federal responsibility for marijuana control while respecting provincial health jurisdiction and particular regional concerns and practices.

The NTJC's main objective is to improve justice through national programs of education and training directed toward judicial proficiency, competency, skills and understanding.

The panelists will include The Honourable Mr. Justice Colin L. Campbell of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Master Calum MacLeod of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, and legal practitioners such as Susan Wortzman, founder of Wortzman Nickle and the Chair of the Steering Committee of Sedona Conference ® Working Group 7, Sedona Canada, and Co-Chair of the Inaugural Program together with Kelly Friedman, a litigation partner with Ogilvy Renault LLP and Co-Chair of Sedona Canada Inaugural Conference, Dominic Jaar, legal counsel at Ledjit, an information management, e-discovery and law practice management consulting firm, Jonathan Redgrave a founding partner of Redgrave Daley Ragan & Wagner and Steering Committee Chair Emeritus of The Sedona Conference ® Working Group on Electronic Document Retention and Production (WG1), as well as Martin Felsky of Commonwealth Legal, David Gray, a partner in the Litigation Group of McCarthy Tétrault in Montréal, Glenn A. Smith, one of the five founding partners of Lenczner Slaght, Karen Groulx, a partner at Pallett Valo LLP, Peg Duncan, Department of Justice, Canada, Robert Deanne, a partner with Borden Ladner Gervais LLP in Vancouver, Ron Hudges of Nixon Peabody, Kenneth J. Withers, Director of Judicial Education and Content for The Sedona Conference ®, as well as other members of the bench and bar from both Canada and the U.S. Panel discussions will focus on 7 key areas:

This was a presentation to 125 judges from Wisconsin's trial and appellate courts as a part of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's judicial education program.

Education about the availability of programs and information about other wellness issues needs to be provided in new judge education and regularly reiterated at judicial meetings in substantive sessions rather than just a five - minute Education about the availability of programs and information about other wellness issues needs to be provided in new judge education and regularly reiterated at judicial meetings in substantive sessions rather than just a five - minute education and regularly reiterated at judicial meetings in substantive sessions rather than just a five - minute reminder.

The program is sponsored annually by the Wisconsin Supreme Court Office of Judicial Education.

Reducing rates of maltreatment, supporting struggling families and improving pediatric and adult outcomes for victims requires community - wide strategies, with true collaboration between child welfare, judicial, education, health and mental health colleagues to advocate for programs that are adequately tested and shown to be effective.

The program is a joint project of the Supreme and Family courts of the NYS Seventh Judicial District, the Monroe County Bar Center for Education, and the Children's Institute Inc..

Chapters describe innovative methods of providing self - help services in large rural and urban communities, judicial education, case management, technology projects that prepare pleadings and other court documents, and a creative mediation program operated with pro bono attorneys and law students.

Today Promise Place has an office in each of the 4 counties in the judicial circuit and provides services to over 3,000 individuals per year through emergency shelter, a 24 hr emergency hotline, legal advocacy, weekly support groups, relocation assistance, financial assistance, crisis counseling, safety planning, a teen dating violence prevention program in all area high schools, follow up services and community education.

Letters are from: (1) Dr. Adrienne Barnett, Lecturer in Law, Director of Undergraduate Admissions, Brunel Law School; (2) Pamela Brown, Esq., Director, Bi-National Project on Family Violence, Legal Services Corporation and Joan Meier, Esq., Founder and Legal Director, Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project (DV LEAP); (3) Carol S. Bruch, Distinguished Professor Emerita, University of California Davis School of Law» (4) Jacquelyn Graham (Abbott), the taking (protective) parent in Abbott v. Abbott, in which the United States Supreme Court held that a ne exeat order establishes rights of custody; (5) Paula Lucas, Founder and Executive Director, Americans Overseas Domestic Violence Crisis Center; (6) Lynn Hecht Schafran, Esq., Director, National Judicial Education Program, Legal Momentum; (7) Sudha Shetty, Esq., Assistant Dean for International Partnerships, Director, Hague DV Project, Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California Berkeley and Jeffrey L. Edleson, Ph.D., Dean and Harry & Riva Specht Chair in Publicly Supported Social Services, School of Social Welfare, University of California Berkeley; and (8) Merle H. Weiner, Esq., Philip H. Knight Professor of Law, University of Oregon School of Law.