Search for: "Matter of Crawford"
Results 321 - 340
of 1,015
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Aug 2016, 9:00 am
What I'm wondering is when is someone going to sue the creators of Pokemon GO for "making" their kid or husband or wife walk into a street or off a cliff or into some other dangerous area (like downtown Lebanon).What with California being the lawsuit capital of the world, it's only a matter of time. [read post]
13 Oct 2013, 12:38 pm
And more generally: We judges and lawyers, we don’t know enough about the subject matters that we regulate, right? [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 11:32 am
[So, in light of this, does responding to a Crawford objection by saying "not for the truth of the matter asserted" satisfy the State's responsive burden under De La Paz?] [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 8:59 pm
I can't recall if the friends were also what lawyers call coconspirators (it means "conspirators"), but it doesn't matter. [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 3:52 pm
The KSC reviewed Crow and its bases and concluded they were no longer viable after Crawford and Melendez-Diaz:This reasoning, grounded on the Roberts test, was undercut by Crawford. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 7:39 am
The Confrontation Clause is not a matter of convenience, he continued; instead, it requires cross-examination to make sure statements are reliable. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 3:30 pm
Crawford v. [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 1:26 pm
Crawford was accused of attempted murder. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 10:30 am
Recently, in the District Court for the Southern District of California, Magistrate Judge Karen Crawford declined to impose adverse inference sanctions against the defendants, despite the defendants’ negligent destruction of relevant evidence. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 10:30 am
Recently, in the District Court for the Southern District of California, Magistrate Judge Karen Crawford declined to impose adverse inference sanctions against the defendants, despite the defendants’ negligent destruction of relevant evidence. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 10:30 am
Recently, in the District Court for the Southern District of California, Magistrate Judge Karen Crawford declined to impose adverse inference sanctions against the defendants, despite the defendants’ negligent destruction of relevant evidence. [read post]
25 Jan 2023, 11:28 am
Mandell told me that when he worked for Crawford, the Crawford managers would never have put up with the type of unethical conduct others agreed to do. [read post]
5 Jul 2005, 8:52 am
In some settings, though a statement made to the expert might appear to be testimonial in nature, because made in anticipation of prosecutorial use, the prosecution will argue that the statement is not being offered for the truth of what it asserts but only as a basis for the expert's opinion; recall that Crawford preserves the rule that the Confrontation Clause is only concerned when a statement is offered to prove the truth of what it asserts.Several courts have held that… [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 7:43 am
For years, the Supreme Court and lower courts have struggled with this somewhat arcane question, a struggle that has been exacerbated by the fact that it often arises as a threshold issue preliminary to the court's reaching some highly controversial substantive issue involving abortion, the death penalty, flag burning, and the other hot-button matters on which the courts are called to opine. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 9:01 pm
Crawford and Testimonial Statements In an opinion by Justice Scalia in Crawford v. [read post]
27 Mar 2018, 8:47 am
” This is a beautiful example of a set of statements that identify factual differences between the cases, but do not explain why the differences matter to whether the right of publicity (a distinct tort from defamation/false light) can be violated. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:21 pm
As Crawford says, we don’t know why Roberts changed sides. [read post]
25 Feb 2016, 6:38 am
" That person is Crawford, the mother of the insured. [read post]
22 May 2021, 9:13 am
This Thursday the Court delivered its judgment, which answers the second as well as two other (first and third) questions of the referring court, pertaining to the jurisdiction in matters of insurance. [read post]
24 Jul 2013, 2:09 pm
” As a threshold matter, the Appellate Court acknowledged that “five years is a lengthy period of time for these types of restrictions. [read post]
