Search for: "Standard Jury Instructions Civil Cases"
Results 501 - 520
of 1,172
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Apr 2016, 10:22 am
After the appellate court vacated and remanded the bribery conviction because of an erroneous jury instruction, the defendants argued that their acquittal on the conspiracy count created double jeopardy problems for re-trial. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 1:50 pm
Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, Jesus instructed. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 1:46 pm
Unfortunately, the Pinellas County website and Bloomberg Law don’t include copies of actual filings with their docket information, but researchers can get an idea of the general instruction contents for negligence cases and calculation of damages at the Florida Standard Jury Instructions – Civil on the state court website.Florida Standard Jury Instructions can also be found on Westlaw and Lexis Advance,… [read post]
16 Mar 2016, 11:22 am
Title VII Is Not A “General Civility Code” The Tenth Circuit panel noted that Title VII is not a “general civility code. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 3:44 pm
The modern standard for this defense was formulated by the U.S. [read post]
28 Feb 2016, 8:20 am
By keeping open the threat of being sued for civil damages, the standard motivated employers to exercise reasonable safety measures. [read post]
21 Feb 2016, 4:28 pm
Asked what their concerns about their place of work were, one Daily Express reporter said: “Relentless cost-cutting driving down morale and journalistic standards. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 8:00 am
Criminal courts require “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” for a guilty verdict while the civil courts require only that something “is more likely to be true than not true” for a verdict (See California Civil Jury Instructions 200). [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 7:34 am
At the hearing, Rueda again relied on Rule 50 of the AAA and section 171.088 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code[4] to argue that the arbitrator could only issue one decision. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 3:14 pm
The Court outlined the reasonableness standard for determining the scope of consent. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 3:14 pm
The Court outlined the reasonableness standard for determining the scope of consent. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 5:08 pm
” Accordingly, the court indicated that it would allow Plaintiff and Defendants to “to present evidence to the jury regarding the loss of electronically stored information and will instruct the jury that the jury may consider such evidence along with all other evidence in the case in making its decision. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 4:39 am
Rational, civilized, empathetic, and normal human beings do not act this way. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 4:39 am
Rational, civilized, empathetic, and normal human beings do not act this way. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 7:39 am
Justice Thomas, for a unanimous Court, said the prosecution does not need to meet the higher standard, even though the jury instructions so stated. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 11:43 am
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) statutory interpretation cases have been in Fashion in recent Terms, and Encino Motorcars, LLC v. [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
Related blog posts: State Supreme Court Finds That Nursing Home Abuse Case Was Filed Properly and Was Not Applicable to the Medical Malpractice Act Nursing Home Resident Death Allowed to Proceed in State Court and Did Not Violate Arbitration Act Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Nursing Home Abuse Verdict Where Two Jury Instructions Were Given [read post]
6 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
This amended section Rule 37 sounds a lot like Illinois’ Pattern Jury Instruction 5.01, “Failure to Produce Evidence or Witness. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 8:00 pm
Bouldin 15-458Issue: Whether, after a judge has discharged a jury from service in a case and the jurors have left the judge's presence, the judge may recall the jurors for further service in the same case. [read post]
30 Dec 2015, 1:18 pm
A prominent First Amendment and defamation law commentator had this to say regarding the differences of opinion on the injunction issue by the majority and concurring justices: The majority and concurring opinions agreed that the trial judge had wrongly based his issuance of the injunction on a general jury verdict finding the defendants liable for substantial defamation damages for having made certain statements, because although the statements enumerated in the jury… [read post]