Sentences with phrase «time argument in all cases»

Some do not agree with holding for a long time argument in all cases.

Not exact matches

His case illustrates the difficulty of succeeding with such a defense at a time when a Colorado court is preparing to hear similar arguments in the trial over a movie theater shooting in which 12 people were killed.

«Lewis wrote in a time when, among the educated British public if not among their professional philosophers, there was considerably more agreement than there is now about what constitutes a valid and rational argument for a given case.»

But by the time Brandeis memorialized his arguments in his famous dissent in Olmstead v. United States, the first wiretap case, the focus on factual circumstances has disappeared, replaced by a broader appeal to constitutional «values»:

That is, if one's interlocutor is being threatened with violence, torture, or death at the same time as he is being confronted with a polemical argument, and if the outcome of the latter determines whether he is killed, tortured, forcibly converted, or whatever (this was, of course, the case for many Jews in medieval Europe), then it is exceedingly doubtful that the polemic is morally proper.

But one thing is now really clear Ramsey on wing is absurd he was mentioned once or twice on highlights for skuffing shots that was it and current defensive line means the work rate argument is secondary... Either put Walcott there or ox... for me it's the latter but this indulgence of wenger is nonesense... in any case with ox he needs to forge link up play which only comes with game time....

Both sides of the arguments were presented by a supporter of «In» side following apologies for not having had time to prepare a case.

Judges of the New York State Court of Appeals listen to hearing arguments from a case on Thursday, Nov. 17, 2016 in Albany, N.Y. (Lori Van Buren / Times Union)

Silver's attorney, Steven Molo, relied on the McDonnell case — which drastically narrowed the definition of corruption — when arguments began before a three - judge panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on Thursday, the New York Times reported.

Prosecutors on Thursday afternoon wrapped up 10 weeks of testimony and arguments in Central Islip, where they sought to make the case that the one - time elected officials accepted an illegal stream of benefits from restaurateur Harendra Singh and, in exchange, abused their public positions to get him two county contracts and more than $ 20 million in town - guaranteed loans.

Both agencies acted with official city and state misconduct, and in both cases, honest, credible evidence was repeatedly dismissed and ignored, and so was the corruption that remains to date — where knowingly false statements were made to discredit me (then later completely reversed during oral argument by my accusers), and both the DOI investigators (who appeared at my doorstep many times to collect evidence) and MTA Office of the Inspector General investigators invited me back to their headquarters (more than six times), from 1989 to 2008), and continued to take no action to restore and reinstate my city job, pension and social security contributions.

But my argument is that just because we have all of that data, doesn't mean you should just go ahead and use it all the time in all cases,» she said.

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Chief Judge Royce Lamberth, who earlier had ruled against the National Institutes of Health, this time came down on NIH's side in several key arguments in the case.

Classification can be a useful tool, but at other times it leads to endless arguments, because the world (or, in this case, the solar system) is usually more complicated than theories imply.

In this case, the argument is that value - added estimates can and should be used to make decisions about where to position high value - added teachers so that they might have greater effects, as well as greater potentials to «add» more «value» to student learning and achievement over time.

After being fired from her post as Chief of the Special Victims Unit for refusing to «go along to get along,» Alice Vachss published the incendiary Sex Crimes, described as «a stark, passionate closing argument in [her] broader case against the criminal justice system» by the NY Times, which named it as a Notable Book of the Year.

Many of today's investors swear by it not because they have considered the theoretical arguments pro and con and been convinced by the pro case but because they made money during the bull and attributed those gains not to the fact that stocks were priced well early in the bull market but to the fact that they were following a Buy - and - Hold strategy at the time.

Given the task at hand, this argument is really a waste of time and energy, but here's the gist of it, in case you need a refresher.

There is one argument in favor of emulation that even the game industry has a hard time making a case against.

Of course Mass may feel that a linear regression of average Texas summer temperatures since 1895 provides conclusive evidence for his case that AGW is currently far too weak to play a significant role in the Texas 2011 heatwave (an argument he recycles in his Aug 9 blog post), but it is strange Mass picks on Rupp et al 2012 without mentioning Massey et al 2012 in the same collection of papers that similarly finds AGW impacts in excess of Mass's method (3 times in excess by my calculation).

I personally think that's a negligible effect, but should I argue that it could be thousands of times bigger, making it a good argument against (I guess in this case) ozone depletion?

For some time now I have thought that the science - based arguments have been «too cute» (radiative forcings and all that) and that the strongest case against the orthodoxy is rooted in common sense.

The only alternative is that they are not capable of understanding my argument, in which case I am wasting my time anyway.

If the author is already peddling denialism based on limited facts used out of context, and this new paper is published likely just to be used as the latest red herring distraction in the global warming argument by examining «Svalbard and Greenland temperature records» in a too limited time span without relevant context, which, just in case some may not have noticed does not represent the region known as planet Earth, uses too short a time span in relation to mechanism outside of the examined region because it is in fact a regional analysis; one is left with a reasonable conclusion that the paper is designed to be precisely what I suspect it is designed for, to be a red herring distraction in the argument between science and science denialism regarding global warming.

Going further in the analysis, the Court validates the argument of perceived conflicts of interests in each of the present cases precisely because both times, the data subjects concerned are decision makers who hold two positions or two interests that can be perceived as conflicting.

Many people who become judges recognize, for the first time, about what actually makes a difference in a compelling argument or case presentation.

Six days before oral arguments, the agency abandoned parts of its own defense, conceding oral argument time to a class of inmates and their families who'd intervened in the case.

While most of the curriculum at Harvard during this time consisted of lecture and student recitation, skills development was also provided in the form of weekly moot courts, during which students argued questions of law before professors and submitted occasional written disputations on legal subjects.121 Although Stearns had previously used moot courts in his teaching at Harvard, Story and Ashmun refined them.122 Cases were handed out the week before argument, and two counsel were assigned to each side.123 The cases would then be argued the next Friday, with the other students taking notes of the argument; the professor in charge that week would issue a written opinioCases were handed out the week before argument, and two counsel were assigned to each side.123 The cases would then be argued the next Friday, with the other students taking notes of the argument; the professor in charge that week would issue a written opiniocases would then be argued the next Friday, with the other students taking notes of the argument; the professor in charge that week would issue a written opinion.124

Special preparation techniques before going to trial Before going to trial, the personal injury lawyers at Ketchmark and McCreight, P.C. like to invest extra time and money in the planning stages of any kind of personal injury claim, including vaginal mesh claims when necessary, and this is why we make use of mock juries and mock trials o help us test out different lines of arguments before using them for real in your case.

The Uniform Jurisdiction Act was begun before all the SCC cases had been decided — but there could still be an argument in support of a legislative safe harbour, rather than having to work through all the factors of «real and substantial connection» every time one wants to launch a action.

But in the non-LiP case of Woodward and another v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2018] EWHC 334 (Ch) which came three weeks after Barton and in which Master Bowles considered the latter subsequent to oral argument, the defendant's solicitors» silence until the time for service had expired over not being instructed to accept service tipped the balance in favour of CPR 6.15 (2) validation.

Countless times in my practice I was searching for the only decision that said something very specific and which gave me a possible argument to go against a whole body of cases that, I found, subtly inapplicable to my situation.

They genuinely like this activity that had the potential to give them fresh ideas or help them stumble on new cases that end up providing the key argument in the case and most of their time spent doing that was absolutely undistinguishable (as far as trying to segregate it in distinct time entries at least) from the time spent doing legal reasoning.

Instead of relying solely on briefs or a brief oral argument to win a case, trial attorneys need to put in a lot more face time.

«I have mentioned a number of times in a number of places, my view that this argument makes no sense at all because a standard of review is not a substantive attack on legislation and because in this case once it was found that Congress had acted within its copyright powers, the jig was up.

At a highly emotional and stressful time, when your children, home, property, and future income may be on the line, you should not have to argue your own case in court, prepare your own legal arguments, or settle your matter without legal advice.

At this point in time, we will determine the best legal argument for your case.

At the time the dispute arose in 1997, Canada should have brought two arguments in front of the WTO dispute settlement body to get the case analysed under NAFTA.

[12] The thrust of the applicant's argument is that previous cases, which held printers liable for the contents of the material they printed, were based on the fact that in earlier times printers necessarily had contact with the subject material.

Carey also put forward the argument that financial information about the funds in question was protected by solicitor - client privilege — a claim hotly disputed in the case — so he had no choice but to return it to Sabourin, who Carey claimed was in dire straits at the time.

Mr Flatterer was not at all convinced by this argument, however, and urged me to award to the applicant wife every penny that the respondent husband had and more, in case more should turn up at some time in the future.

Although on the facts of the case, the Court concluded that the part - time income received from Sobeys did not rise to a sufficient level to make it a substitute for her work at PJ — M2R Restaurant Inc., it raised the possibility that such an argument could be made in the appropriate case.

The last time the court scheduled an oral argument in September was to decide the constitutionality of the McCain - Feingold Act in the McConnell case.

The savvy and effective lawyer is the one who reads her morning case alert emails, took a CLE on effective oral arguments the week before, and looked up all the statutes in the complaint she just got from her client just to make sure that nothing has changed since the last time she read those very same statutes.

First, if the guidelines are completely non-severable in all cases (as two district judges have held), she has a right to resentencing; at resentencing she would have a reasonable argument that the SRA's requirement of «a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary,» would call for a sentence with no jail time.

That quote will cover off all court appearances from first appearance to the trial or sentencing; it covers all letters and communications with you, the Crown, experts; it covers all communications with parties including witness preparation, and trial preparation; it covers the drafting of legal applications and arguments and the time spent researching relevant case law; it also covers all costs associated with the presenting your case in a brief to the Crown as part of the plea bargaining process and / or the costs associated with a trial if the matter proceeds that way.

The Court further relied on what it called a «somewhat relaxed» burden of proof in asbestos cases, thereby minimizing the argument that evidence relied upon by the parties would become stale over the passage of time, another policy reason behind the application of statutes of repose.

Where a case has been in the system for a long time and has been delayed through no fault of the plaintiff, a good argument can be made that the plaintiff should not «lose» what could amount to tens of thousands of dollars in PJI simply because the case was delayed in proceeding to trial.

Case also involves consideration of issues and argument in relation to legal principles concerning very recent Court of Appeal authority on demurrage time - bars.

[9] By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, it had been going on for over 20 years, a point that was stressed by Justice Lebel in oral argument.