Search for: "Patty Scott"
Results 201 - 220
of 222
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Nov 2007, 10:00 pm
Also, JC Bradbury compiles some thoughts from other legal commentators about the Bonds case, and Keith Scherer provides this extensive analysis of the Bonds case; Norm Pattis provides this interesting post that analyzes the probable prison sentence that Bonds is facing, which is far less than those typically reported in the mainstream media. [read post]
11 Nov 2007, 3:13 pm
In a heartbeat, other criminal defense lawyers drew near to weigh in on the subject, including Norm Pattis, who couldn't comprehend that cooperation with the government is wrong, and Scott Greenfield who said he has a position between the two of them.Coming up to seven miles, Steve Bainbridge and I squeezed down energy gels followed by water and Gatorade chasers handed us by some of the many thousands of volunteers helping out. [read post]
2 Nov 2007, 10:14 am
Norm Pattis writes about lawyers who won't help people snitch (hat tip to Scott Greenfield); he draws an analogy to the practice of medicine: I would not consider myself well served by my doctor if he were to announce that a life-saving treatment was available, but that he would not prescribe it because, well, it offends his sensibilities. [read post]
2 Nov 2007, 4:52 am
Here are a few items from around the blogosphere that deserve Grits readers attention:The Drumbeat of InnocenceCharles Kuffner on Preventing Wrongful Convictions and Exonerating the Innocent, pointing to a liveblog of an event held by the Drum Major Institute.The Ethics of Representing a SnitchAttorneys Mark Bennett and Norm Pattis stake out opposing views, with Scott Greenfield leaning Mark's way while straddling the fence. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 4:11 am
Scott explains “law porn”. [read post]
25 Oct 2007, 10:51 am
This lawsuit was filed in Sherburne County District Court.According to the complaint, Scott Reber ate a hamburger made from a Cargill ground beef patty on September 22. [read post]
22 Oct 2007, 4:33 am
Norm Pattis has a new blog. [read post]
19 Aug 2007, 5:43 am
Scott? [read post]
30 Jul 2007, 4:00 am
May it please the Court, Scott at Simple Justice doesn’t like old lawyer phrases. [read post]
30 Jul 2007, 3:41 am
Like Scott Greenfield, I was not overly fond of prosecutors' "common sense" arguments (though it took this Simple Justice post to clarify why), but this Connecticut definition is an abomination.A "jury's" verdict is in fact twelve individual verdicts. [read post]
26 Jul 2007, 5:29 am
Simon and Scott Jacobs are criminally complicit. [read post]
22 May 2007, 3:42 pm
Twombly, making it more difficult for private plaintiffs to file antitrust claims against large companies; Professor Scott Dodson weighs in here at Civil Procedure Prof Blog; at Volokh Conspiracy, Einer Elhauge has these thoughts; Patti Waldmeir of the Financial Times has this story; in the Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports here (subscription req'd); and Peter Lattman has this post at the WSJ.com Law Blog. [read post]
16 May 2007, 3:53 am
Scott's motion to set aside the final decree of divorce with regard to the provision of an incorporated settlement agreement addressing the support of his children with Patti R. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 2:36 pm
In Scott v. [read post]
19 Apr 2007, 6:15 am
In The Houston Chronicle, Patty Reinert reports that "Supreme Court wrestles with insanity question; Justices focus on procedural issues as they hear Texas death row case. [read post]
16 Apr 2007, 3:05 pm
Patty Reinert and Mike Tolson report here on Panetti v. [read post]
16 Apr 2007, 7:53 am
More on US Supreme Court arguments this week in Panetti mental illness case: Patty Reinert and Mike Tolson have this story in the Houston Chronicle, entitled "Court asked to define insanity in death row case," on this week's arguments to be heard by the US Supreme Court in the Texas death case of Scott Panetti. [read post]
15 Apr 2007, 11:38 pm
U.S. high court asked to define insanity in case of Texas man By PATTY REINERT and MIKE TOLSON Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau WASHINGTON â€â [read post]
2 Feb 2007, 5:40 pm
§ 7321-7326), or at least review a list of may's and may not's under the Act, or watch a 50-minute Hatch Act video (including an intro by Special Counsel Scott Bloch). [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 6:44 am
Patty Millett will argue for the SG. [read post]
