Sentences with phrase «opposing lawyers in our cases»

As pro se litigants, we're at tremendous disadvantage against the opposing lawyers in our cases.

Not exact matches

In death penalty cases, lawyers are allowed to dismiss any juror who is opposed to the death penalty,» UCLA law professor Adam Winkler told Business Insider in an email messagIn death penalty cases, lawyers are allowed to dismiss any juror who is opposed to the death penalty,» UCLA law professor Adam Winkler told Business Insider in an email messagin an email message.

Yesterday, the same day an appeals court questioned lawyers about the case, the government filed documents in a lower court arguing that the lawsuit brought by two researchers who oppose human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research should be thrown out.

The case winds up in family court, mother and son fighting each other for custody, leaving the judge with the authority to decide the girl's fate, Courtroom drama follows, with Frank defended well by his lawyer, Fred Cullen (Glenn Plummer) and opposed by child welfare authority rep, and we do get to hear the decision of the court, allowing us to take sides as well.

I consider it a strike against a lawyer to be one who hogs the limelight as opposed to lawyers who put the client in front while the lawyer concentrates on winning the case.

Repeat for lawyers who are required to take up cases in which they may be quite strongly morally and ethically opposed to.

But if they are dealing with an unreasonable opposing party or lawyer, they will prepare like there is no tomorrow, will give their case their all and will make sure they do everything in their power to achieve what the client deserves.

Lawyers should counsel their clients just because the mediator may spend more time in the opposing parties» room, that does not necessarily mean that the mediator believes the other side has the more compelling case.

The motions judge in SC v. NS concluded that the act of one lawyer for a client sharing the opposing party's compelled discovery evidence — in this case, documents — with another lawyer representing the same client in another related proceeding constitutes prohibited «use» of the evidence.

How an Experienced Birth Injury Lawyer Can Help For a successful case, it is often necessary to hire experts, take depositions and gather evidence in an effort to oppose the lawyers of large insurance firms.

Attorneys put up large sums of money on these complex cases in order to hire experts, and investigators, take depositions, gather evidence and oppose the lawyers of large corporations and their insurance firms.

At its simplest level, lawyers from the same law firm can not take on opposing sides in the same case but they should also not act for the competitors of major clients of the firm.

A Virginia lawyer who ran afoul of discovery requirements in a major wrongful - death trial by allegedly encouraging a client to clean up his Facebook account has paid his $ 544,000 share of a $ 722,000 legal fee award to opposing counsel and seen an $ 8.5 million award to his client and other plaintiffs in the case upheld by the state supreme court.

Track record delivers on this but takes it a step further in that it enables any lawyer who worked on a case to identify co-counsel or opposing counsel of the same case, providing both sides equal opportunity to express their own perspectives of the case.

As a Denver criminal defense lawyer, her commitment to her clients and persistence in advocating their cases have earned her respect from prosecutors, opposing counsel, and judges.

Additionally, because so many of David's cases in litigation relied upon obscure rules or technicalities, David often finds that he is more prepared then opposing lawyers.

In 27 per cent of family law cases the opposing side had no lawyer at all and another 21 per cent had no lawyer for part of the case.

SRLs just think that lawyers are manipulating the system to delay their matter and confuse them, and complain that when they bring forward something that they believe to be important to the merits (rightly or wrongly, and usually because they have read about it in a case or on a law website) they are regularly told that they are wasting the court's time (ironically, often because they are speaking to the merits, when the motion requires them to only address the colour of opposing counsel's socks).

Lawyers assist in the preparation of the lawsuit and throughout the various stages of discovery — the process by which opposing parties exchange relevant, non-privileged information relating to the case.

In a death penalty case, a lawyer calls him on a phone number provided by the court (which turns out to be the judge's cell phone) with the full knowledge and consent of opposing counsel, to discuss a scheduling matter.

In such cases, I found that it was critical to be crystal clear with everyone involved — the client, the opposing party or lawyer and the court — about the nature and extent of my involvement in the filIn such cases, I found that it was critical to be crystal clear with everyone involved — the client, the opposing party or lawyer and the court — about the nature and extent of my involvement in the filin the file.

However, many lawyers have a much higher percentage of «non-recommended» reviews filtered out, in some cases even outnumbering the recommended ones, which suggests some hanky - panky in the form of soliciting fake reviews, either on the part of the attorney or the opposing side.

The case study was obviously created by someone who does not know enough about wills law, but then it is easy to denigrate or even jettison a practice area one knows little about, does not practice in, derives no income from, and never receives the appreciative feedback from the individual, as opposed to corporate, clients who have been so well served at modest cost by the lawyers in that «expendable» area.

At the same time, I do wonder whether a stand - offish manner to opposing counsel hurts a lawyer's client in the long run by making a prosecutor less likely to cooperate or exercise discretion to drop a case or reduce charges.

It seems undeniable that in a trial, if one of the lawyers spends 80 or 100 percent of his or her cross - and direct - examination time arguing his or her case through the window of the witnesses on the stand and the opposing attorney using traditional methods gives up the opportunity to argue the case during direct examination (and as a result is able to argue his or her case through the window of the witnesses on the stand only 50 percent or less of the time), the first lawyer will have the advantage.

You might have a different scenario if, say, a teacher were accused of abusing a student — though in that case, I think the experience is that the likelihood of the teacher being fired, as opposed to transferred to other duties or suspended with pay pending the resolution of criminal or disciplinary hearings (in which the accused or his or her lawyer is typically allowed to confront his or her accuser) is practically nil

Of course the next obvious question is why didn't the plaintiff lawyers call the regulatory College (CPO) to confirm that this «opposing expert» was in fact properly qualified to proffer neuropsychological opinion evidence for the defence in brain injury cases?

From the moment you walk into our office, we will begin preparing your case for trial — making sure we do everything possible to ensure opposing lawyers know we are ready, willing and able to defend your rights in court.

I am familiar with Rod's expertise as a worker's compensation lawyer from being opposing counsel to him in numerous cases, and then sitting on appeals when I was on the Court of Appeals.

Defendants in civil cases used to try to bury opposing lawyers during discovery by handing over truckloads of documents and hoping they would never be able to find the one or two damning documents in the bunch.

A lawyer's «eruption of irritation» at a letter from a paralegal working for opposing counsel who cited case law was not a matter for the Law Society of British Columbia, a hearing panel decided, but it is a shining example of an issue the legal profession will have to work through if it wants to flourish in the future....

In that case the client alleged that having lost all faith in his solicitors as a result of their conduct (particularly in a key meeting with the defendant and its lawyers), he settled his claim at 66 % of the total value, as opposed to the 75 % he would have settled for had he retained trust and confidence in his law firIn that case the client alleged that having lost all faith in his solicitors as a result of their conduct (particularly in a key meeting with the defendant and its lawyers), he settled his claim at 66 % of the total value, as opposed to the 75 % he would have settled for had he retained trust and confidence in his law firin his solicitors as a result of their conduct (particularly in a key meeting with the defendant and its lawyers), he settled his claim at 66 % of the total value, as opposed to the 75 % he would have settled for had he retained trust and confidence in his law firin a key meeting with the defendant and its lawyers), he settled his claim at 66 % of the total value, as opposed to the 75 % he would have settled for had he retained trust and confidence in his law firin his law firm.

If you are a lawyer, would you agree that in your practice many cases are controversial only because the opposing counsel is sloppy, did not do enough research or has a giant ego?)

In a decision that recognizes the importance of fostering informal mentorship, the Ontario Superior Court held (in 1623242 Ontario Inc. v Great Lakes Copper Inc., 2014 ONSC 782 (CanLII)-RRB- that a lawyer who provides a general opinion about the state of the law to a colleague without being privy to the specific details of the colleague's case or the identity of his or her client and is later retained by a client opposed in interest to the colleague's client is not thereby disqualified from representing his own clientIn a decision that recognizes the importance of fostering informal mentorship, the Ontario Superior Court held (in 1623242 Ontario Inc. v Great Lakes Copper Inc., 2014 ONSC 782 (CanLII)-RRB- that a lawyer who provides a general opinion about the state of the law to a colleague without being privy to the specific details of the colleague's case or the identity of his or her client and is later retained by a client opposed in interest to the colleague's client is not thereby disqualified from representing his own clientin 1623242 Ontario Inc. v Great Lakes Copper Inc., 2014 ONSC 782 (CanLII)-RRB- that a lawyer who provides a general opinion about the state of the law to a colleague without being privy to the specific details of the colleague's case or the identity of his or her client and is later retained by a client opposed in interest to the colleague's client is not thereby disqualified from representing his own clientin interest to the colleague's client is not thereby disqualified from representing his own clients.

«Detainees» Lawyers Oppose More Filings»: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, «Attorneys representing hundreds of Guantanamo Bay detainees urged a federal appeals court Monday to reject a Bush administration request for more legal filings in light of last week's Supreme Court ruling in the case of Osama bin Laden's driver.»

Finally, in the odd case of Ferreira v. St. Mary's General Hospital, substantial indemnity costs were ordered against a lawyer who had unilaterally commenced legal proceedings, without instructions, in order to oppose the decision of her client's wife and next of kin to withdraw life support from her client.

A civil lawyer resume objective is written by a lawyer who wants to work on civil cases, as opposed to criminal cases, and where he writes his goals, ambitions, skills and knowledge in order to give the employer a glimpse of his expertise on legal affairs.

However, because trial remains an option, in litigation practice lawyers always must have cases run on two tracks: (i) reach out and attempt to come to settlement with the opposing party while (ii) always preparing to fight it out in court in the event that settlement is not reached.

Further, an «aggressive» divorce lawyer is likely to cost a lot more money and drag out the divorce for many years, as he or she will be in and out of the courtroom, engaging in extensive opposition research and depositions and witness preparation and case law research and battle planning, and the opposing counsel will likely respond in kind.