Search for: "MATTER OF RULES OF EVIDENCE"
Results 3661 - 3680
of 42,199
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Oct 2011, 4:00 am
Before the Musgrave court issued its rulings, it spent time - way too much time - emphasizing how tough it is to preclude evidence via in limine motions: "To obtain the exclusion of evidence under such a motion, a party must prove that the evidence is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds. [read post]
31 Jul 2012, 7:21 am
In 2011, the trial court heard the matter and entered a Final Decree. [read post]
In calculating overtime, failure to aggregate hours of workers with two part-time jobs not ‘willful’
22 Sep 2017, 7:03 am
At the close of the employees’ case, the county made an oral motion for entry of judgment as a matter of law, arguing the employees’ evidence was insufficient to create a jury question on willfulness. [read post]
16 Aug 2017, 7:00 am
We need not resolve this issue, because it matters not whether we treat the first group of texts as one or eight incidents of harassing conduct. [read post]
5 Jul 2018, 11:22 am
The post Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Warrantless Blood Draw in DUI Cases Allowed appeared first on DUI BLOG. [read post]
13 Apr 2007, 11:36 am
The distinction between substance and process is evident in the Supreme Court's Unitrin opinion:The effect of a proper invocation of the business judgment rule, as a standard of judicial review, is powerful because it operates deferentially. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 4:42 pm
McConnell (Stanford), one of the leading American originalist scholars: I most often agree with my good friends and casebook co-authors Will Baude and Michael Paulsen on matters of constitutional interpretation. [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 6:38 am
Neither a franchise agreement nor the economic realities test supported a finding that an owner/franchisor, by merely providing advice to a struggling franchisee, acted as the employer of its cook, the Fifth Circuit ruled, overturning a jury verdict and finding the owner/franchisor was entitled to judgment as a matter of law (Orozco v Plackis, July 3, 2014, Stewart, C). [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 1:09 pm
Evid. 106 admits only “writing[s] or recorded statements” which in fairness should be considered as a whole, when only portions have been admitted, the common law doctrine of the rule of completeness is only “partially codified” in Rule 106 and more broadly includes oral statements, the court held. [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 5:00 am
Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), a government attorney generally cannot disclose any “matter occurring before the grand jury. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 6:00 am
Our firm has over 30 years of experience in criminal appeals matters and has been recognized as an AV rated law firm. [read post]
28 Jul 2021, 2:00 am
I had in mind a particular body of evidence to support this claim. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 3:35 am
In the matter before Justice Brown, the accounts were said to lack the detail required by the Rules, and provided information at the "30,000 foot" level. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 9:26 am
In Thuraissigiam’s case, relevant evidence would have been the record of violence and persecution against people of Tamil ethnicity in Sri Lanka. [read post]
8 Jun 2008, 10:17 pm
The court ruled that the pretrial objections did not save the issue for appeal. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 2:31 am
All these rules have as their goal a fair and complete decision on disputed matters before the tribunal. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 9:00 pm
On the other hand, Melendez-Diaz is so new that it may just be a matter of time for other appellate courts to rule that Melendez-Diaz bars records custodians' certificates without the testimony of such custodians. [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 9:00 pm
The quality of evidence matters in every case. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 3:30 am
While the standards for expert witness testimony may differ between state and federal courts, all federal courts are bound by Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Daubert v. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 11:16 am
The court should not resolve the borrowed-employee issue unless the evidence concerning the factors is so one-sided that it warrants judgment in a moving party’s favor as a matter of law. [read post]
