Sentences with phrase «reasons than the trial»

The Court of Appeal upheld the result, but for different reasons than the trial judge.

Not exact matches

It took jurors less than 90 minutes to reach a verdict in the eight - week corruption trial of ex-NYC Councilman Dan Halloran that was marked by delays, a mistrial for a co-defendant — state Sen. Malcolm Smith — and several juror dismissals for personal reasons.

Trial and jury consultant Marshall Hennington said one reason personal - injury lawyers do so well in The Bronx is because «disenfranchised» jurors often make decisions based on emotions rather than evidence.

«Because of the pride on how we tackled terrorism and defeated Boko Haram terrorists through our gallant troops and partners in the twilight of the previous administration, which is the reason I have insisted on open and public trial of my stewardship rather than secret trial in the court as being canvassed by my prosecutors.»

«Because of the pride on how we tackled terrorism and defeated Boko Haram terrorists through our gallant troops and partners in the twilight of the previous administration, that is the reason I have insisted on open and public trial of my stewardship rather than secret trial in the court as being canvassed by my prosecutors.»

Caproni's succinct style kept the trial's pace moving at a healthy clip, and she found more than a few reasons to castigate Silver's defense team, too — especially Molo, whom she admonished for arguing, talking over witnesses and editorializing during cross-examination.

Thus, so far, it has never been investigated whether individuals in clinical trials experiencing side effects from antidepressant medication, and for this reason may have guessed that they have not received placebo, also respond more favorably to treatment than those without side effects.

Reasons for the attrition rate included absence of effective drugs, timing of genomic testing in the course of a patient's disease, less - than - optimal access to targeted drugs or clinical trials, and patient and provider preferences.

Discounted trial subscriptions result in higher conversion rates than do free trial subscriptions, if for no other reason than discounted trials require some sort of payment information entry.

If for any reason a claim proceeds in court rather than in arbitration you and we each waive any right to a jury trial.

- IF FOR ANY REASON A CLAIM PROCEEDS IN COURT, RATHER THAN IN ARBITRATION, YOU AND WE EACH WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL.

More than any one piece of advice, marketing in the self - publishing world is about trial and error, being willing to put in the work, and consistently giving the audience you do have content and reason to keep an eye on you (for future sales).

It is because of this reason that learning by trial - and - error will be a little more frustrating than it would be if you had more breaks between the waves of enemies.

«The most active period of the witchcraft trials coincides with a period of lower than average temperature known to climatologists as the «little ice age»... In a time period when the reasons for changes in weather were largely a mystery, people would have searched for a scapegoat in the face of deadly changes in weather patterns.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, and accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against conviction dismissed — Although trial judge did not address analytical steps in order, he properly analyzed evidence and concluded that injuries sustained by victim were not accidental and could not have occurred in any other fashion than as stated by victim — Having provided reasons for accepting victim's evidence, trial judge was entitled to reject accused's evidence — Trial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resuTrial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, and accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against conviction dismissed — Although trial judge did not address analytical steps in order, he properly analyzed evidence and concluded that injuries sustained by victim were not accidental and could not have occurred in any other fashion than as stated by victim — Having provided reasons for accepting victim's evidence, trial judge was entitled to reject accused's evidence — Trial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resutrial judge did not address analytical steps in order, he properly analyzed evidence and concluded that injuries sustained by victim were not accidental and could not have occurred in any other fashion than as stated by victim — Having provided reasons for accepting victim's evidence, trial judge was entitled to reject accused's evidence — Trial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resutrial judge was entitled to reject accused's evidence — Trial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resuTrial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resulted.

Just as Judge Boswell correctly demanded a court cite for the ADA's assertion that Wilson did have the «right» to pro se, she should have made the demand of Wilson if for no other reason than a test of Wilson's ability to handle a trial.

«I see no reason why the trial should take more than one week,» he wrote in a decision that, among other things, set stringent time limits for cross-examination of witnesses.

At trial, the plaintiff sought pay in lieu of common law «reasonable notice» and argued that his written contract was unenforceable for two reasons: the contract allowed for termination without notice in case of «continuing incapacity considered permanent» (based on legislation that was later amended) and allowed for termination on only 15 days» notice even though his service at the time entitled him to much more than 15 days» notice under the ESA.

Reversing the trial judge's decision, it held that there was an appropriate relationship between the reason for the local authority's actions and the tenant's disability, and that the tenant had been treated less favourably than others to whom that reason did not apply.

As a result of this sub-rule, people who bring an ICBC claim to trial in BC Supreme Court and are awarded less than $ 25,000, may be disentitled to their Tariff Costs unless they can show «sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court.»

Being the person who gets to confront, on the record, a judge who has gone off the rails is just one reason that trial lawyers live the law more than the typical lawyer ever gets a chance to.

Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Cranbrook Registry, confirming a post trial «costs swing» should not be avoided because the net payment will be less than a jury intended.

Yet founder and lead trial attorney John Gomez is noticeably humble when describing the reasons that he, and his team of more than 20 attorneys, are successful.

The reasons for reversal had to do with the fact district judges have to explain the bases for an award and «show the math» in more rigorous fashion than California trial judges, who do not even have to issue a statement of decision.

The trial judge made the award without providing an exceptional reason to justify the decision to award a notice period longer than 24 months.

At para. 1 of the judgment, Newbury J.A. wrote ``... Since the case turned almost entirely on the facts found by the (summary) trial judge and is unlikely to be of interest to anyone other than the parties, I do not intend to rehearse the facts in these reasons except to the extent necessary to explain our conclusions».

Their more than 100 years of trial experience, more than 6,000 cases handled, track record of success in dealings with insurance companies and millions of dollars in settlements and verdicts for our many clients are major reasons why you should choose our law firm to represent your interests.

In view of the above, the trial judge had an obvious and legitimate reason for refusing to make the transcript public any sooner than he did.

If the reasoning around the punitive damage award was less rationalistic, it would likely be less objectionable: rather than trying to wash the inherently subjective awarding of punitive damages with a patina of determinism, the Court would be better off simply acknowledging that there is little, if any, substantive content to their various pronouncements on the topic and deferring to the trial award (they seem happy to do so for so many other aspects of the law, both in this case and others, why not punitive damages awards?).

There is a reason why this product has claimed the majority of the market share for trial presentation software for more than 10 years: It can actually make it interesting for a jury or other fact - finder to listen to a witness testify about corporate balance sheets, long - ago emails, and other documents that can be fatally boring and lose the attention of the fact - finder.

I suppose there could be valid reasons why 4 out of every 5 jury verdicts go in favor of the doctor or hospital — maybe the strongest cases are all being settled before trial, leaving only the weakest cases behind — but it's hard to say that with a straight face when those figures mean that malpractice defendants have better odds winning in a courtroom than the odds a casino has winning its own games.

In Ontario, class action judges have consistently treated the «reasonable possibility» threshold as a relatively low standard, holding that the plaintiff must simply show, based on a reasoned consideration of the evidence, that there is something more than a de minimis possibility of success at trial.

In the Stanley trial, several Indigenous jurors were rejected for no apparent reason, other than their race.

Whether the offer was more advantageous than the award at trial and whether it was unjust for the usual Part 36 costs consequences to apply were separate questions and there was no reason why the same material could not be relevant to the judge's consideration of both.

In the NPRM we proposed to permit covered health care providers and health plans to deny an individual access to inspect and copy protected health information about them for five reasons: (1) a licensed health care professional determined the inspection and copying was reasonably likely to endanger the life or physical safety of the individual or another person; (2) the information was about another person (other than a health care provider) and a licensed health care professional determined the inspection and copying was reasonably likely to cause substantial harm to that other person; (3) the information was obtained under a promise of confidentiality from someone other than a health care provider and the inspection and copying was likely to reveal the source of the information; (4) the information was obtained by a covered provider in the course of a clinical trial, the individual agreed to the denial of access in consenting to participate in the trial, and the trial was in progress; and (5) the information was compiled in reasonable anticipation of, or for use in, a legal Start Printed Page 82555proceeding.

Jury nullification in the broader sense can cause cases to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal for reasons # 4 or # 5, but most of the time, jury nullification will not cause a verdict to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal (even if statements from jurors after the trial make it clear that jury nullification in the broader sense actually took place), if a jury that weighed the evidence and evaluated the credibility of the witnesses differently than the actual jury did could have reached the same verdict.

It is for this reason that in nominally non-adversarial litigation such as child care proceedings and, increasingly, in personal injury litigation — where settlement rather than trial is now the norm — joint or agreed instructions are given to the expert.

Look at the first sentence in para. 9 of the reasons: «While jury trials in civil cases seem to exist in Ontario solely to keep damages awards low in the interest of insurance companies, rather than to facilitate injured parties being judged by their peers, the fact is that the jury system is still the law of the land.»

Though the collaborative model will not be the cheapest model in all cases, it has a substantial opportunity to cost less than traditional trial practice for several reasons.