Sentences with phrase «opinion considered in the case»

Participation means that everyone gets to take part in discussions, express their views, and have their opinion considered in the case planning and decision - making process.

Not exact matches

Writing in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Acosta said that «we have carefully considered the record in this case, and the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, and have found no principled legal basis to change the June 9 date while we seek public input.»

In reply to your comment that, «each [account] has their own investment objectives and time lines, so in my opinion should be treated separately,» I'd make the case that you may be able to save some money on taxes by considering your taxable accts and retirement accts as one portfoliIn reply to your comment that, «each [account] has their own investment objectives and time lines, so in my opinion should be treated separately,» I'd make the case that you may be able to save some money on taxes by considering your taxable accts and retirement accts as one portfoliin my opinion should be treated separately,» I'd make the case that you may be able to save some money on taxes by considering your taxable accts and retirement accts as one portfolio.

Consider Stevens» brief dissenting opinion in the recent landmark case approving Ohio's school voucher program.

Gorsuch had been considered a top contender early on because of his opinion in a case about the obligations of employers to provide insurance benefits that include contraceptives.

In case of any allergic reaction, it is always advisable to consider immediate medical opinion to avoid any fatal circumstances.

Also in this issue: six recommendations to fix Detroit's broken school system, three expert opinions on whether high schools should offer two - tiered diplomas, and a piece on the Vergara v. California case that considers whether litigation is the best approach to reforming teacher tenure policies.

Yet if the justices consider public opinion next term, it will be a straightforward decision in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case challenging the California «union shop» law that levies an agency fee on all teachers who refuse to join a union.

In my opinion, users seeking a great tax filing experience should consider H&R Block or TurboTax and users seeking a deal should use TaxHawk (or in some cases TaxSlayerIn my opinion, users seeking a great tax filing experience should consider H&R Block or TurboTax and users seeking a deal should use TaxHawk (or in some cases TaxSlayerin some cases TaxSlayer).

If this is the case, consider getting a second opinion with a veterinarian that either offers hospice care for mid-ground palliative care options that might be lower in cost, yet still reduce any suffering.

When one considers how low the Ontario Fiberals had to stoop to find «experts» to support their ban in the court case, it becomes very obvious that expert opinion in this important area is ignored.

We consider for consultation requests or referrals from: law enforcement in cases suspected of criminal abuse; animal control officers in cases of unknown cause of harm or death; veterinarians seeking second opinions; and attorneys who have accepted cases for potential civil litigation.

Note that while we encourage deferring to experts in any specific domain, due to people's intuitive tendency to have excessive confidence in their own opinions and underestimate the value of expert opinions, we consider going against expert opinion a violation of the pledge only in the case of a clear scientific consensus.

You know therefore considerably in the case of this topic, made me in my opinion consider it from so many various angles.

I think it's clear that if the same standard were applied in the Mann case, none of the allegedly defamatory statements are specific enough to be considered factual accusations rather than mere opinions.

In considering what's protected opinion and what's defamatory, it's interesting to compare the Mann case to a recent 9th circuit case that also attracted a lot of attention, OBSIDIAN FINANCE GROUP, LLC.

In order more fully to illustrate the mischief of denying a hearing to opinions because we, in our own judgment, have condemned them, it will be desirable to fix down the discussion to a concrete case; and I choose, by preference, the cases which are least favorable to me — in which the argument against freedom of opinion, both on the score of truth and on that of utility, is considered the strongesIn order more fully to illustrate the mischief of denying a hearing to opinions because we, in our own judgment, have condemned them, it will be desirable to fix down the discussion to a concrete case; and I choose, by preference, the cases which are least favorable to me — in which the argument against freedom of opinion, both on the score of truth and on that of utility, is considered the strongesin our own judgment, have condemned them, it will be desirable to fix down the discussion to a concrete case; and I choose, by preference, the cases which are least favorable to me — in which the argument against freedom of opinion, both on the score of truth and on that of utility, is considered the strongesin which the argument against freedom of opinion, both on the score of truth and on that of utility, is considered the strongest.

In this case, your unsupported generalization that «the electorate could not care less» about climate change was rebutted with actual opinion polls showing that significant majorities of «the electorate» do, in fact, care a good deal, and consider the issue a priority for the President and the Congress, and support policies to regulate GHG emissions and to hold fossil fuel corporations responsible for the full costs of their productIn this case, your unsupported generalization that «the electorate could not care less» about climate change was rebutted with actual opinion polls showing that significant majorities of «the electorate» do, in fact, care a good deal, and consider the issue a priority for the President and the Congress, and support policies to regulate GHG emissions and to hold fossil fuel corporations responsible for the full costs of their productin fact, care a good deal, and consider the issue a priority for the President and the Congress, and support policies to regulate GHG emissions and to hold fossil fuel corporations responsible for the full costs of their products.

In other words, there are some (policy relevant in my opinion) limitations on how bad climate change can get, even when considering exceedingly low likelihood worst case scenarioIn other words, there are some (policy relevant in my opinion) limitations on how bad climate change can get, even when considering exceedingly low likelihood worst case scenarioin my opinion) limitations on how bad climate change can get, even when considering exceedingly low likelihood worst case scenarios.

In most cases, though, 400 to 1000 square feet is what most people in the tiny housing world consider small but it's all really a matter of opinioIn most cases, though, 400 to 1000 square feet is what most people in the tiny housing world consider small but it's all really a matter of opinioin the tiny housing world consider small but it's all really a matter of opinion.

If the undifferentiated and general nature of the retention of the data of any person using electronic communications in the Union was one of the main reasons why Directive 2006 / 24 / EC was considered as going beyond what was strictly necessary (para. 59 of the DRI case), such data retention schemes are possible as long as they respect strict conditions (see the opinion of AG Saugmandsgaard Øe on the joined cases Tele2 Sverige AB and Secretary of State for the Home Department, commented on this blog).

Entertaining different views of the questions now before us in this case, and having arrived at a conclusion different from that of a majority of the Court, and considering the importance of the case and the constitutional principle involved in it, I shall proceed, with all due respect for the opinion of others, to assign the reasons upon which my own has been formed.

in case a Member State or the European Parliament may lodge formal objections regarding compliance of the HTS with the requirements which it aims to cover (see Article 11 of Regulation n ° 1025/2012), such an objection can not be considered — per se — as the expression of a «controlled legislative delegation in favour of a private standardisation body», as suggested by the AG (see para. 55 of the Opinion).

[77] In this case I am obliged to consider a proposed expert who has on at least 3 occasions had his opinions disregarded by the Court for bias and advocacy for the Defence.

In the end, the LSUC panel considered five factors in awarding the lawyers costs: their complete co-operation; their «huge effort» in asking the LSUC to reconsider its case; the hardship they faced and the effect on their careers; the fact both sides conducted themselves professionally; and the fact the LSUC «never put forward an opinion based on the facts of this case.&raquIn the end, the LSUC panel considered five factors in awarding the lawyers costs: their complete co-operation; their «huge effort» in asking the LSUC to reconsider its case; the hardship they faced and the effect on their careers; the fact both sides conducted themselves professionally; and the fact the LSUC «never put forward an opinion based on the facts of this case.&raquin awarding the lawyers costs: their complete co-operation; their «huge effort» in asking the LSUC to reconsider its case; the hardship they faced and the effect on their careers; the fact both sides conducted themselves professionally; and the fact the LSUC «never put forward an opinion based on the facts of this case.&raquin asking the LSUC to reconsider its case; the hardship they faced and the effect on their careers; the fact both sides conducted themselves professionally; and the fact the LSUC «never put forward an opinion based on the facts of this case.»

Earlier this month, a Rhode Island appellate court issued a written opinion discussing principles that are important to understand for anyone considering filing a personal injury case in South Florida.

and other one - world liberals who have persistently pressed judicial nominees in recent years to consider the legal opinions of foreign courts and other bodies when deciding cases here at home?

In this case, the police officer's legal opinions constituted an inducement that render the statement involuntary for the following reasons: i) the legal advice provided by the police officer was central to the issues that the accused ought to consider in assessing whether or not to provide an inculpatory statement; and ii) the accused had stated he wished to seek the advice of Counsel before providing a statement; and iii) the accused did not expressly waive his rights or indicate that he had changed his mind about consulting Counsel before providing a statement; and iv) no reasonable opportunity was given for the accused to consider his options; and v) it can be reasonably argued all subsequent statements were influenced by the police officer's legal advicIn this case, the police officer's legal opinions constituted an inducement that render the statement involuntary for the following reasons: i) the legal advice provided by the police officer was central to the issues that the accused ought to consider in assessing whether or not to provide an inculpatory statement; and ii) the accused had stated he wished to seek the advice of Counsel before providing a statement; and iii) the accused did not expressly waive his rights or indicate that he had changed his mind about consulting Counsel before providing a statement; and iv) no reasonable opportunity was given for the accused to consider his options; and v) it can be reasonably argued all subsequent statements were influenced by the police officer's legal advicin assessing whether or not to provide an inculpatory statement; and ii) the accused had stated he wished to seek the advice of Counsel before providing a statement; and iii) the accused did not expressly waive his rights or indicate that he had changed his mind about consulting Counsel before providing a statement; and iv) no reasonable opportunity was given for the accused to consider his options; and v) it can be reasonably argued all subsequent statements were influenced by the police officer's legal advice.

For example, statements of opinion are not actionable and many of the alleged falsehoods in the McLibel case would be considered to be statements of opinion in U.S. law rather than statements of fact.

Under AB 8408 judges considering motions or verdicts in non-jury trials would have 9 months from submission of the motion / case to render an opinion.

Under the bill judges considering motions or verdicts in non-jury trials would have 9 months from submission of the motion / case to render an opinion.

They can also be asked to provide an opinion on other important factors that should be borne in mind when considering a business case, such as issues of liquidity and whether one spouse can draw significant sums from a business to meet a financial settlement.

In the same vein, public opinion might produce a tainted or unfavorable jury if charges were pressed now, but the jury might be less likely to have pre-existing opinions or to consider the case a hot button issue once publicity around an incident has died off.

The finding, however, is considered an expert opinion and is admissible as evidence in the court case.

«In my opinion, on the facts of the immediate case, given the extensive history of providing benefits, denying benefits, considering appeals of the denials, making more denials, inviting further appeals, and progressively and retroactively restoring benefits, there was some objective reason to think that the commencement of the limitation period had been delayed.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Utah issued an opinion in an interesting case considering the age at which young children can be held legally responsible for their own negligent actions.

Earlier this month, an appellate court issued a written opinion in a personal injury case that presents an important issue that Florida car accident victims should consider when preparing their case.

This case considers the duty of care needed when an employer expresses an opinion in a reference.

The majority opinion suggested how the the Board could consider a motion to amend in case there is settlement between the parties:

Justice Francis Flaherty in his written opinion stated, «In our considered opinion, the issues of fact inherent in this case necessitated a trial; there was not only one possible conclusioin his written opinion stated, «In our considered opinion, the issues of fact inherent in this case necessitated a trial; there was not only one possible conclusioIn our considered opinion, the issues of fact inherent in this case necessitated a trial; there was not only one possible conclusioin this case necessitated a trial; there was not only one possible conclusion.

It may issue an opinion on its own initiative in cases in which it considers such action appropriate.

Fair use is also a fact - intensive, case - by - case analysis, but in my opinion, it is likely that creating a computer program derivative work (17 U.S.C. § 101) of the game for your own personal education would be considered fair use.

These the Court can not correct by imposing a guilty verdict without the jury, and these are the only cases, in my opinion, properly considered as «jury nullification» cases.

The cases I see mentioned which get conflicting opinions about specifically say that the main part of the bill is paid in real money, but the tip (which is arguably optional and may or may not be considered theft) is left in such fake bills.

If you disagree with the insurer's expert reports or opinions (e.g. about how repairs should be carried out, or how damage occurred), you should consider obtaining your own comprehensive expert evidence to establish your case, and point out any flaws in the insurer's evidence.

In its Octane opinion, the Supreme Court applied a much more flexible standard, ruling that trial courts should award fees «in the case - by - case exercise of their discretion, considering the totality of the circumstances.&raquIn its Octane opinion, the Supreme Court applied a much more flexible standard, ruling that trial courts should award fees «in the case - by - case exercise of their discretion, considering the totality of the circumstances.&raquin the case - by - case exercise of their discretion, considering the totality of the circumstances.»

The court has a duty to consider your opinions and views and if the judge in your case considers it appropriate, he can appoint a solicitor to represent you in public child law hearings.