Search for: "In Re Judicial Ethics Opinion 2011-3"
Results 1 - 20
of 96
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Apr 2024, 11:33 am
”[3] Egilman’s claims about silica, however, were never supported in this article or elsewhere. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
This blogpost will briefly discuss the Court’s decision and then highlight some aspects of the opinion and the questions left unanswered. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 4:08 pm
”[3] The Court thus showed that it was well aware that well-ground (and thus admissible) opinions may not have been previously published, and that the existence of peer review was simply a potential aid in answering the essential question, whether the proponent of a proffered opinion has shown “the scientific validity of a particular technique or methodology on which an opinion is premised. [read post]
14 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
(I think Robert admires Taft almost as much as I admire Dean Guido Calabresi).[20] Yet, as Robert also observes, “Few now remember that Taft had forever altered the nature of the chief justiceship, the Supreme Court, or the federal judiciary[,]….his efforts at judicial reform or the construction of the contemporary Supreme Court building”[,] or “the judicial landmarks he thought he had established. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 1:11 am
It is a sign of respect, adds to their economic wellbeing and importantly, protects their ethical rights in the resale of their works. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 2:31 pm
Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence Certainly, judicial thinking evolved since 1993, and the decision in Daubert. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 11:28 am
: Questions of Judicial Ethics and Policy,” 29 Fordham Urb. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 1:09 pm
Ethics 567 (2011). [5] Ferric C. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 7:00 am
Supreme Court.[6] One influential re-articulation came in Wisconsin v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 6:14 am
” “In her opinion, Kennedy cited previous examples of recusal matters in the state, namely In re Disqualification of Dezso from 2011, which established that affiants have a burden to prove that their affidavits are timely filed. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:59 am
Nevada Comm'n on Ethics v. [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am
See note 9, infra (discussing such comments in In re Franklin National Bank Securities Litigation and Bank of Dearborn v. [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 1:00 am
Re AB: Termination of pregnancy. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
(See my previous column with Jennifer Koshan on judicial education here.) [read post]
13 May 2022, 4:36 am
” As might be expected, EOIR receives a sizable number of complaints.[3] For example, in 2018 and 2019, EOIR received approximately 579 and 684 complaints respectively. [read post]
12 Jan 2022, 6:47 am
(3) Rojas v. [read post]
7 Jan 2022, 3:00 am
Now They’re Running for Office. [read post]
5 Aug 2021, 5:01 am
From In re Liu (2d Cir. 2011) (and see also In re Hood (11th Cir. 2013)): [W]e conclude that [Liu's] ghostwriting did not constitute sanctionable misconduct. [read post]
28 Feb 2021, 12:47 pm
The need for revisions to the third edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence (RMSE) has been apparent since its publication in 2011. [read post]
4 Jan 2021, 1:26 pm
The directors’ and officers’ liability environment is always changing, but 2020 was a particularly eventful year, with important consequences for the D&O insurance marketplace. [read post]
